skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Traditional view: There is one experimenter, he picks a marble, it is either red or blue. If the experimenter repeats the measurement, he gets some red, some blue, with some percentage chance.

MWI view: There are many experimenters, in fact there is a continuum of them for each "run" of the experiment. The "setup" of each run that produces the mixed state in the bowl of marbles is splitting the whole universe (at the speed of light) and also splits the experimenters. Some of them are now in the "red" universe, and some of them are now in the "blue" universe and give matching answers. The percentage of them giving each answer is the same as in the situation above, but this percentage applies to even one run of the experiment.

However, the many experimenters and their percentages is not observable in a single experimental run from inside their universe. The experimenters cannot communicate, so after each run they only have 1 bit of information each (red or blue). They need to repeat the experiment to gain more than one bit of information.

However, now, their states are different. Some experimenters have a different history to the others. They aren't all the same any more! There's no "reset" button. This is the core of many of the "mysteries" and "apparent superluminal communication" in QM. There's no mystery. The state -- including the experimenters -- is splitting.

The classic "superluminal" communication isn't: Entangled opposite particles are simply saying that some universes have the (A,B) pair, others have the (B,A) pair. When you find out that you have the "A" particle, you instantly know that in your universe the other guy must have the "B" particle. There's no communication, instead the experiment is all about finding out one bit of information about "where you are" in the multiverse.
love the "Expanse" themes!
Technology you don't own is cheaper because the provider can sell your data. I suppose it's a "good thing" there exists tech the poor can afford.
It's a pretty standard anti-inclusivity rant (although it starts by attempting to position itself as more than such), and then ends with an anecdote/strawman (which is contrary to every notion of inclusivity advocacy that I've seen) to propose that those advocating for inclusivity are the real people who want segregation.

I think what a lot of the commenters are missing is that this article, and statements like "If I must revise my teaching to conform to a popular view of inclusivity that I do not share" have an impact on not just his research, but also sends a message to his students: that he doesn't whether they feel safe being there matters, and that they don't deserve to have representation in studied works.

I know a lot of people (mostly white, mostly men) don't think that's true, but these types of attitudes can easily allow harmful messages to fester in academic classrooms. Just because an idea is controversial doesn't mean it's worthy of debate. The idea that we should want more students to feel welcome in academia, and that we should study history and literature that has largely been ignored (or often, deliberately destroyed) is one such idea to many people.

So I know most of the people on this forum will disagree, but I think it's perfectly reasonable for an organization to say that they don't want their name associated with that.

The position in that article isn't a new or particularly interesting idea: it's been rehashed over and over, and studied, and it's an idea that many people have decided is harmful and they don't want to associate with it or people who continue to spread those ideas.

I probably don't have the eloquence to properly convey these thoughts, but there's a whole field out there that cares deeply about these things and has been working on making them better for, literally, centuries. In tech I often see people frustrated that the public doesn't understand what they're talking about when they discuss technologies (see the 5G conspiracy theories!). If you're interested in understanding why many people think doubling down on these ideas that inclusivity is in contradiction to good research/teaching/whatever, there's a whole field of literature out there to read up on that can help explain that. If you're in the US, one decent starting place is the history of black people in the US, and the history of women in the US. I've heard really good things about this series, for example: http://www.sceneonradio.org/seeing-white/
'crypto-fascism' and the concept that anyone can easily identify 'dog-whistle politics' strikes me as a somewhat McCarthy-style method by which to coerce a group of people to condemn an individual without much need for explanation as to why they should be condemned -- even if the individual being condemned is pleading against the perceived hostile opinion.

It seems to be a very trendy right now.

It's sort of a perfect technique to mention in a thread about blacklisting.

"We don't care if you say you're not a member of the Communist party; look at who you hang out with and the opinions you write -- we have read between the lines and understand the secret message held within your action, and we know that you're a communist."

Pretty scary stuff.
I've been singing a song every day since November, part of my power-off activities. I recorded before and after about two months. Before then I'd never sung more than Happy Birthday so I expect most people can sing better, but I love it.

Here's a recording, which includes a story about how This Land Is Your Land brought me to tears at the litter everywhere https://shows.acast.com/leadership-and-the-environment/episo.... I also pick up litter daily, though I've been doing that since 2017.
Brazil == lawless land
Gab Was Hacked Again
The general problem, I think, is that talking the talk is not that hard, especially if you're not already well-covered in that domain (e.g. an established department/strong competency in the specific area) -- see all of sales. It's not that hard even if you are well-covered in that domain -- see all of pre-sales, and all of consulting. The fundamental issue is that describing a solution in broad strokes is much easier than in detail, and an interview doesn't give you so much time to even get into those details; and spending time to further evaluate is at least weeks of effort (because it's difficult to differentiate between someone competent getting up to speed on your codebase, and someone incompetent, and someone incompetent but can be made competent, without sufficient time to evaluate).

A lot of time is burned in recruitment cycles, largely because its much easier to say you're competent than to prove that you're not. (not to mention the natural reluctance & possible legal difficulties with firing).

Jobs get thousands of applicants; few of whom are worth considering, and resumes/interviews really don't tell you all that much. They tell you more than nothing, which is why they're used, but it's difficult to be comfortable on those alone, and there's not that much more you can do before it becomes weeks/days of free labor by your candidate.

Anyways, there's more than enough money burned on the subject that "throw more marketing at the problem" is very likely too easy an answer.
What's even more amusing is that the right views the left as hypocrites too, because they were previously against it. Seems like everyone is a hypocrite.

I was convinced that it's a good thing that the right is most impacted by the censorship, as the right was more supportive of capitalism and it caused them to notice some of its problems, while the left is already against it. Needless to say, it didn't turned out exactly how I expected and apparently we're bound to repeat this vicious cycle forever, only normalizing the worst possible tactics along the way.
Pst, the "general public" are listening !
The white savior industrial complex is an important brand influencer segment. This is significant emotional labor they perform for “the is it Poles?”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_savior

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/47245/the-cambridge-l...
This is a challenging issue. I see a few reasons that companies want to increase demographic diversity. One would be that some companies are trying to address more demographically diverse markets and having more diverse teams may reveal more opportunities, or at least help to prevent blunders. For example, if you have people from many skin tones on your team, it's natural for then to say attempt to use a product on themselves and not fix it. If you don't have someone on the team (or at least in a test group) from those backgrounds, you may not think to test broadly--not that anyone was actively trying to be discriminatory--just that it's pretty natural to test things on yourself and within your network. Another reason is to have a stronger work force. A natural human thing to do is to recruit within networks--who did I go to school with? Work with? Where did I go to school? But, if I restrict myself to that pool, maybe I miss out on excellent candidates who went elsewhere. For example, I once found an amazing intern from a tiny college that I never heard of--but he was amazing (now staff at Carnegie Mellon). Finally, there are questions of social justice--organizations should reach out to populations that are underrepresented and ask if their recruiting/hiring processes have blind spots. On the recruiting side, are we reaching outside of our normal channels to recruit? For example, one of my coworkers took on an intern from a community college to do some physics/software project. The intern did well and transferred to the local state school and kept working--as a result, they got several job offers based on that work. On the hiring side, does the current methodology result in good hires? Are relevant characteristics being considered? For example, we sometimes bring on postdocs and as part of the review someone screens them based on their undergraduate grades. To me, this is dumb--no idea where it came from, I care about what they did during their PhD, not if they got a B in calculus as a teenager. It rates right up there with how fast they can run a 400 m race. Not terribly predictive of their ability to do research and probably results in the loss of some good candidates (for example, I met a young woman who went to a crap high school, spent college recovering from crap high school--she went to a small university for her masters and did incredibly well, and now she's at Harvard doing publishing good papers during her PhD--under the current system, she would probably not make it pass that screen). What happens once you have people in the institution is a longer discussion--basically, are people promoted fairly (based on performance)? Are these evenly applied?
I feel the same way but I quickly realize that as soon as all of those walled gardens and advertising networks are gone, a lot of the "free" or "cheap" tools and programs I like no longer are available. This is a combination of the fact that most people simply aren't willing to pay for the stuff they use and would rather have ads and the fact that the remaining pool of people willing to pay is too small to split the cost to something reasonable.

Until we reach a point where we can break that cycle, getting a machine like he's describing is going to either be really expensive or impossible.
Lack of proposed actionable solutions does not imply a lack of problem. Especially when just convincing people that there is a problem will help avoid the problem (i.e., if everyone agreed racism exists, and is a problem, there would be fewer implicit biases coming into play).

Sure; you can create hiring processes that hide as much identifying information as possible. That doesn't address the issue in other parts of the workforce though. Trying to just be as colorblind as possible for yourself doesn't address the systemic issues, nor the biases coworkers/etc may have. It also doesn't force others to adopt the solution you propose.

Recognize the contexts people aren't blind in and be an advocate for diversity in them (not instead of ability, but alongside it). Recognize that a person's lived experience may be different from yours because of their skin color or gender. Which implies recognizing when their skin color or gender is different than yours.
Netherlands it is then they had their special chip and pin wallet since the 2000’s if anything going without it was quite hard before contactless became prevalent.
Yup. I'm a bit on the "weird" spectrum. Some of my pithy sayings make Yogi Berra look like Plato.
You could buy a flip phone
Abolish is a synonym of cancel. Culture is the product of collective agreements.

You Sir, are in fact suggesting we create a cancel, cancel culture.

Instead of eradicating the evil, you are embracing it.
I don't get it. For the "affordable" argument, you can buy a Raspberry Pi with Linux. Or any NUC with Linux. For everything else, system76, purism, think penguin, libiquity...
You have (almost?) no way to verify how the transistors inside the computer chips are wired. And even if you design your own chips, you can't really know if the design you specified has been faithfully followed at the fab facility. It's a tough problem.
Neopets is reckoning with black market pet trading
Great Women in Programming and Science
The parent I was replying to said "and can't be publicly discussed is the main issue".

You absolutely can, trivially as the huge number of discussions or the ISO date format on StackOverflow show: https://stackoverflow.com/search?q=ISO+Date

There are lots of issues with locked down standards. But copyright means they can't be publicly discussed is factually incorrect.

(Also fair use means it's fine to quote enough context for a meaningful discussion anyway)
You're absolutely changing the question. The original post was about not listening to anything someone has to say because they're a "monster."

Worth of life is an arbitrary discriminator, but even if we use it your example doesn't really carry much weight.

Let me make it as simple as possible: even the worst criminals are human. The best dogs are not.

I also think the concept of putting down animals merely out of convenience is a broad, largely inaccurate brush. It's usually done in an attempt to reduce suffering. In some places we do this with humans well - not out of malice, but out of empathy.
And the file format was entirely replaced with XLSX.

Yes, there were plugins to support XLSX (and even ODS) in Excel 2003, but it wasn't well-known.
Isn't that kind of lumping a great number of people with very different mindsets into a big group of Idiots Because They Don't Think Like Me?

I won't spend the time to go through and contradict every single one of your points, but let's not forget that Tipper Gore (Al Gore's wife at the time) was the main push behind the parental advisory labels, freedom fries is a joke to 100% of the people I've talked to about it, and just because not everyone agrees at what point (or whether) an abortion becomes synonymous with a murder does not mean that everyone on the right wants to rule over women (unlike some cultures that do exist to this day in other countries).
The PinePhone is definitely more open and trustworthy, but it also feels pretty useless for the time being. Its Allwinner A64 processor is antiquated, about like a lower-end Android phone from half a decade ago and with only 2–3GB of RAM, but the Phosh software stack isn’t optimized well for these limitations and the device moves at a crawl. Just opening the screen to turn the wifi on or off takes over five seconds. (Yes, there is also UBports, but that is based on 2014-era Ubuntu-specific software that even Ubuntu moved away from, and the whole thing feels like it is bitrotting now.)

I also worry that there isn’t enough of a development community behind the PinePhone to bring it to a basic level of polish. Instead of being the resurrection of the Nokia N900 as a hackable Linux phone, the PinePhone might actually be a repeat of the ill-fated Openmoko Freerunner.
‘Many forms of <versioning> have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that <semantic versioning> is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that <semantic versioning> is the worst form of <versioning> except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…’

Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947
Please see my other answer, just below, for how I think about your response.

Also, omg I cant believe you just used the word 'chops'. It's like a fighter pilot from ww2 just teleported into the chat.
In other words, statistically biased outcomes cannot be attributed to the place where the statistic was measured, without further evidence upstream.
> now have cartel power

Interesting insights. You get most of it right about Lebanon: Yes, you're right its all about money and maintaining the status quo. But its not so much about the neighborhood generators. To be honest, thats a bit low brow for Leb politicians. When we're talking about corruption its usually to the tune of $10s of millions. Case in point, look at the longtime central banker who funneled the nation's bonds through his brother's trading company and pocketed $300 million in commissions. [1] Now were talking real money.

With electricity, yes, its about vested interests - but its also about future interests. Who will control new power plants? New Power grids? New billing systems? Can we make sure that for each Sunni hired in this position we have 1 Christian and 1 Shia as well?

Thats why nothing ever gets done in Lebanon.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-04/u-s-said-...
IMO we do need to change our anti-trust definition to get rid of the requirement to show consumer harm and decide that concentration, in and of itself, is against the public interest. It's hard to demonstrate consumer harm when you don't know which technologies didn't get started because of high entry costs, or because high app store gate-keeping fees. We should also discourage obtaining a monopoly as the end goal of a business.

This is not to say that we should make the notion of an appstore illegal, as there is consumer benefit in a curated app store, but something like limiting fees that can be charged to a reasonable association to fees recoverable from the expense of maintain the app store infrastructure and app-review infrastructure seems like a reasonable requirement. E.g. regulate natural monopolies that cannot be broken up like utilities.
I use Vivaldi, but use a different browser for Facebook, to limit tracking (although Zuck probably knows it's me from the IP address). That browser used to be Chrome, but now Chrome warns me when I save JPEG files that it might be harmful to my computer. What the fuck? Sure there was a JPEG decoder exploit, iirc on Windows, but that was years ago. And the stupid warning is not disable-able. So, I now use Firefox to browse Facebook.
NBA Topshots and Flow: My Centralized Experience – Dapper
"Probably not going to be the most upbeat topic but it is something that has come out of months of frustration and now being de-platformed for continuing to ask the same questions within the project. NBA Topshots, Dapper Labs and FLOW. I am not going to sit here and shit on them from a great height, even though I could. Instead give you the documented evidence I have retained in my plight and let you decide if this is just growing pains or if the teams at Dapper and FLOW have just been asleep at the wheel."
I get the feeling you could be tempted to say more about that. Please elaborate?
This is a "have my cake and eat it too" rant, it has nothing to do with reality. He wants it to run Excel, he wants to be able to use google/fb/whatever. He just wants to be able to do it in a way that costs nothing or next to nothing and that somehow still gives him "full autonomy and control". Or, more accurately, the ILLUSION of full autonomy and control. Why an illusion? Because no matter how much control he has over his own computer, it doesn't matter the minute it talks to another computer. By definition he doesn't control that computer, and he is by definition trusting it to treat whatever personal info he discloses correctly. So his dream of a fully autonomous and controlled computer won't even give him what he really wants.
> that needs a 'but' in there somewhere

It does, thank you.
> The more possible execution paths, the higher the score.

Great! Now we can all begin to write branchless code. Make branch prediction miss a thing of the past!
FFmpeg/libavcodec is already available.
The question then, really, is how far are you willing to go down the stack of software on hardware, in pursuit of true ideological purity? How can, even the Pinephone manufacturers, be absolutely sure that their design is being implemented in hardware as they specced it, without backdoors?

If you have a near infinite amount of money and resources, you can be absolutely certain (the hardware that runs NSA approved type 1 crypto goes through a very thorough vetting process), but such a concept is economically unrealistic for anything that normal people can buy.
The (not cost effective) solution is to carry both.

Shut off the 'normal' smart phone when you don't need it (for banking or what have you).

Use the web version of Whatsapp (https://web.whatsapp.com/) if you must use it. You could even consider having a WhatsApp specific phone if you have an older model that you've upgraded from that contains no other data.

That was my solution anyway.
Surely making a standards organization entirely dependent on subsidies by forbidding it from selling literally the results of its work in a free economy isn’t going to backfire in any way…
Hey all. Why yes, I make experimental techno. If you want to annoy your neighbors, this just might do the trick. Enjoy!

https://soundcloud.com/shinerclay
go to bed before you burn too many neurons
I guess they mean the freedom (or lack thereof) of the software license that comes with your OS, ie. 'you should be able to hit the software with a metaphorical hammer', which technically isn't possible with the Windows 10 license.
That's one reason, but economies of scale are another. If the movement to reject technology you don't own gained traction, the cost of joining that movement would also come down.
I want to add that while the complexities of building a PC or understanding fundamentals of open source and licences is steep... For anyone who wants these constraints but is unwilling to be curious enough to learn the ways of DIY/makers is gonna get smashed on this forum IMO. I would hope to see a sub-thread of OP asking for "advice" on how to achieve a solution solo (unless I missed it...) . I am a huge advocate for [devs] building their own PC's for fundamental understandings..
They're not overpriced, they're expensive. And they are expensive because they are rare. And they are rare because vendors stopped manufacturing them. And vendors stopped manufacturing them because most people do not refuse to buy a device "that is designed largely to maximize the profits of the computer industry".
The author clearly has never cleaned toilets for a living, yet waxes philosophical, completely missing the point on why public services are kneecapped in this country.
You might be interested in Pyspread: https://pyspread.gitlab.io/
I grew up in Ghana. I saw first-hand that women in poverty have many children but those with middle-class circumstances have fewer. Africa's population explosion [0] will slow only when the people climb out of poverty [1]. Total world population is half of the climate change CO2 equation.

Malaria has an incredible suppressing effect on entire societies [2]. Many young children get sick with it monthly and miss school. Older children miss school to care for sick siblings. Parents miss multiple weeks of work every year because of it. And even after they're well enough to work again, they're not 100%.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Africa#Populat...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_and_fertility

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria#Economic_impact