skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Nope. Literally any method of getting from A to B faster than light would, has a causality paradox. it does not matter if you cover the miles between FTL, or pop out of a hypothetical wormhole gate: If you end up outside of your own light cone, no matter how, there's a causality paradox.
Tax Day for individuals extended to May 17
As much as I like to Encrypt All The Things™, unless you're concerned about somebody stealing the physical device, you don't need to encrypt it.

It should be possible to set up an encrypted directory with something like FUSE (though afaik FUSE doesn't run on the reMarkable), though. https://github.com/evidlo/remarkable_entware lets you install fstools.
Please don't take HN threads further into gender flamewar hell.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
My research is also on dev tools, and I have tried to get my research findings adopted. It is hard. Companies often want to release incremental, small features, not major UI overhauls.

Even when I've done research at companies or been funded by them to study their products, it is virtually impossible to get it adopted into the product. Again, the incentives and motivations of PMs are very different than researchers.
People don't seem to get that "ejaculation" also means sudden speech. No fucking sense of humor or vocab. >.<
Your methods and conclusions make no sense - associating with women doesn't get you canceled, Kevin Spacey didn't molest any women as far as I know.

Smugness makes no sense when what it appears is you have some deep rooted psychological issues that need addressing.
The fairness doctrine only applied to broadcast TV, never cable. This is a myth that will never ever die and I see repeated constantly, even though it's been debunked numerous times by Snopes and others. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ronald-reagan-fairness-doc... The fairness doctrine was also abused by multiple administrations to go after broadcasters who were overly critical of them- FDR did it, so did Kennedy, Nixon, etc. The government is not and should never be the arbiter of what's 'true' or 'fair'. I'm always amazed that it never occurs to people that the gov't might use this power in bad faith, yes?

But no, the fairness doctrine has nothing to do with Fox News, it never applied to cable
You seriously think that life now, with all of the advancements in technology and healthcare, is not better than it was 40 years ago? Not better than the 1980s?
And I am calling that fear bullshit. If you cannot articulate the differences, then why are you making the suggestion? A "gut feeling"? Well, then that might be sexist and deserve being called out as BS. And if everything was fine between those 3 people...just clarify things on twitter?

The fear of a hypothetical "someone" taking something "totally reasonable" out of context is, in my experience, held mainly by people who have a private definition of "totally reasonable" not held by the majority and who'd like to continue holding it without consequences.
One issue with Pawpaw is that some varieties have high levels of acetogenins:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annonacin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetogenin

There are some low annonacin varieties: Sunflower, Wabash, Potomac, Zimmerman, and Wells.
The Murderbot books are good, but holy crapballs they are expensive.

Full book price for practically a novella.
How does the "timelines" feature, otherwise known as the feeds list format, work? I mean if I'm not on mobile, will it still work? Also, I have lots of feeds, will it accept an .opml import?
Imagine a woman were to say, if we don't put an end to casual sexism, the end result we're heading for is that men will take any woman they see, kidnap her, and lock her in a dungeon.

A much more realistic and likely outcome, and a far less hysterical perspective than yours, is that the needle was way too far one way, now people are learning to cope with it shifting, and if we try to be more empathetic, perhaps getting help when we need to, we can shift it to a better place than it was before.

How do I know this? Because identical dynamics play over and over, change is scary, even if it is for the better, and people have opposed it on similar grounds -- it would lead to absurdities and worst outcomes for everyone involved -- since time immemorial. For example, see some arguments against women suffrage from just over a hundred years ago [1]:

> Because the acquirement of the Parliamentary vote would logically involve admission to Parliament itself, and to all Government offices. It is scarcely possible to imagine a woman being Minister for War, and yet the principles of the Suffragettes involve that and many similar absurdities.

> Because Woman Suffrage is based on the idea of the equality of the sexes, and tends to establish those competitive relations which will destroy chivalrous consideration.

And, of course, women do not want the vote [2]

The belief that we can -- and must -- work tirelessly change the world by, say, allowing humans to fly and even reach other planets, but when it comes to how people should speak to one another, well, that's too difficult to change, there's no point in trying, and if we try then the outcome will obviously be bad, just seems so bizarre.

[1]: https://www.johndclare.net/Women1_ArgumentsAgainst.htm

[2]: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1903/09/why-wom...
What kind of substances? Is there a course syllabus?
The problem with this is that there is no alternative. There's a theory that QAnon-types are too shrewd about the motivations of media, leading them to not trust anything that comes off as reasonable.

We interpret world events entirely through the lens of massive, politically-embedded corporations. To avoid that lens, we'd have to visit those places ourselves and investigate, which, to say the absolute least, is not scalable.

The oddest aspect of modern media is that when it comes to foreign coverage, the smaller the outlet, the more likely that they are actually on the ground where they are reporting from. Representatives of large outlets clump together in hotels attending press conferences from government representatives and interviewing designated sources whose names were passed to the journalists by intelligence services. Journalists with no money just travel to countries and go to where the action is happening.
"They later wrote a Java version, jRMTool, but it’s only for an old version of Eclipse with a completely different API. The code is written in Java 1.4, and is no longer even syntactically correct. I quickly gave up trying to get it to run."

"A few years back, my advisor hired a summer intern to work on MatchMaker. He instantly ran into a barrier: it didn’t work on Java 8."

"A couple years ago, I tried to use the Java Whyline. It crashed when faced with modern Java bytecode."

He's answered his own question. Developer tools wear out quickly as their environment changes. Unless they have support that keeps up with the development environment, they die.
This is amazing. I'm glad a woman pointed this out.
New NFT Boobies Pixel Art
This will hit your company/industry eventually.
Going back further Network (1976) is all about this.
This inspired me to hook up the piano I once bought but then never touched.

Two questions:

1) Can you make it more sensitive to slow keypresses? I have to press
quite fast / with force to get the keypress recognized (for comparison
pianobooster does recognize my slow (quiet) press).

2) Can you recommend midi files that are well supported? Most
midi-files I found on my PC don't work at all. Those who do look
different in pianobooster (for example pianobooster has notes on both
hands but pianojacq only one one).

Thank you.
Competing? On one hand we have businesses trying to pay people to do work. On the other we have the government paying people to do nothing.

Wow gee I guess businesses just need to up their game.
This is real, and it's also a type of sexism. Not all forms of sexism or discrimination are acts of malice. The sexual harassment training required for my job speaks explicitly about disparate treatment.

I do question one of the examples a bit. The idea of giving advice to female founder to step down as CEO in favor of a male cofounder sounds like bad advice. It's pointing out one rather drastic solution, rather than the actual problem. Better advice would be to lay out the observed issues and help think through a range of possible solutions, if everyone can get on the same page about the problems. Maybe the solution would still be a change in roles, but there's a lot less chance it would seem sexist the advice were predicated on a lot more information.
This article deeply, deeply fails to resonate with me. I'm not outraged. I'm not outraged by some guy making some poltiically incorrect statement, I'm not particularly outrage by the people who sleuth through their twitter comments to find a reason to be outraged. It's just not important. What's more- it seems it's only important to people who already think it's important. It was both a reason for RMS to leave the FSF and not a reason for him to leave the FSF. It was entirely determined by how much he felt accountable to outrage.

The thing is though, I don't personally believe that it should be all or nothing. I don't want to go on your crusade, but I do want to discuss things and I think we can say things are bad without the tandem groups who are "cancelling" people and decrying "cancelling" people. Both those groups take extreme stances to stifle reasonable discussion. The constant railing against "cancellation" is just as stupid and unthinking as the people who want to form a mob and "cancel" people.
And even worse than this, is that I see people go on to accuse the writer of the second story as being an apologist for the events in the first, and making them out to be even worse than the perpetrators of the first story. Essentially, whoever is the first to bring "bad things" to light, must be immediately trusted and considered completely truthful and no criticism is possible. Whoever "cancels" somebody first automatically wins. There is no chance for defence, counter-argument, or questioning the "evidence"/here-say. If you get in first with breaking a story, event, past mis-deed, then you win.
Who are “we”? Anglo-Saxons? Unite States Citizens? or even only a subset of the later? particularly those active in finance and other fields where a man's social conformance weighs more than his skills.

I can't say that I have ever in my life noticed much of the Anglo-Saxon gender, race, and other such politics in real life and I remain sceptical as to what extent it is actually true within Anglo-Saxon offices, for I find that all “sides” of the issue seem to offer very different, contradictory experiences, and mostly reads as a rather exagerated an implausible story of how bad it is for one's own side.

Though there might be a kernel of truth behind some of it, most of it reads as though the writers see boogymen, and unreasonable fear, and I will say that when actual hard statistics be available, they almost always paint a very difficult picture than what is complained about in all these “culture war” discussions, and that certainly goes for all sides.
American Antigravity (Channel On YouTube)
The above comment says

> There are supposedly seven people who "died in the Jan 6 riot"

And then proceeds to dispute this, by showing that... each of those 7 people died as a result of injuries in the riot, with the sole exception of the suicides.

The question is what standard of "dying in the riots" would satisfy OP, if the literal interpretation (died from injuries sustained in the riot) does not satisfy him. Presumably if they were gunned down in the streets?
Given the context is the dogmatic approach to office culture, this comment is super ironic. Of course the firings were a correct decision from your (insane and skewed) perspective.
In my opinion this article is a cry from people that don’t understand how to find a market fit and then “sell” their idea. I think it’s pretty typical point of view from academics that their idea is ground breaking and should be know by everyone. However, things don’t work like that in the real world. Meritocracy doesn’t make the best tool rise to the top. You also need to solve a problem for a huge amount of people and then do a bunch of PR and educate.
Make it look like the Google reader interface and all will be good lol.
> The Black Lives Matter movement was a telling example of this - police brutality is indeed an ongoing problem in society, but it doesn't just apply to black people. It's anyone the police feel they can get away with abusing. Just look at how they treat homeless people, drug addicts, and so on, regardless of race.

And if you actually stuck around in leftist circles you would see how the "indentarians" as you so called them are in opposition to those, too.

> First mixed-race female Vice President of the USA - okay, but what sort of shitty role model is this?

Everyone I know in identity politics circles was critical of her too! Indeed!

I think you've essentially misunderstood why there was a push against solely class-based analysis, and why identity-specific systemic oppression was introduced to this concept -- the two are not in opposition. The reason it was brought in was because measures to deconstruct and eliminate class-based oppression, often kept systemic inequality between identity.

For example, the push to eliminate sexism has for the most part only advantaged white women (You'll have to trust me on the proof for this since I'm writing this while on the go -- however look up books like Carceral Capitalism and "Why I Don't Talk To White People About Race" for examples). The introduction of how your identity impacts how class boundaries affect you was necessary to better understand the dynamics and better shed and cast off systems of oppression
As long as they clean up the gobs of dirty money afterwards. Might want to put down a towel or plastic sheets first.
You mean the rise the grievance culture and its insecure leader.
But the Black Lives Matter movement never proclaimed that police brutality only applies to Black people.
I really used to like https://interfacelift.com, but there hasn't been consistent uploads in about 2 years, though there are still a lot of great wallpapers on that site.

The best in the past couple years has definitely been https://unsplash.com .
I think the key is that wronged parties really do not care that much about the wrong being corrected as much as they desire retaliation
Shrugging off insults doesn't equate to being a doormat.

If you insult your boss, do you expect him to flip out and lash back at you to prove his status within the company? Or does he just laugh it off and then ask his assistant to make a memo to fire you later in the day?
Note that it is also in the interests of those who want to spread misinformation that the public trusts the media that they publish, and ascribes its "failures" to incompetence rather than intentional manipulation of public opinion.
There's got to be a better HN policy-level solution than this. This author put their article behind a paywall because they get paid for that. And here we are, a pretty well-to-do community, stealing it. I don't see how it's our choice to do that. If this author wanted to share it with us, they have a non-paywall article link they could share (or they would have published it outside the paywall).

We could just not allow any paywalled content in the feeds. That would include the NYT. Or we could mark it so that people knew not to click through if they didn't have a membership. Or... I bet several of the big publications, Better Programming which I run and Towards Data Science would be fine reflexively posting the non-paywalled version here. They key though is that the authors really deserve to be part of that discussion.
Brave new world ;)
Let's circle-back on this over lunch.
The point the article was trying to make, not the tool descriptions. Though to be fair, the point was probably only to showcase some cool ideas to inspire people to consider dev tools more. Maybe I tried to read too deep into it.
From OP's post

> If enough people actually did this

A classic HN comment misstep. Most people aren't like the typical reader here (for better, for worse). It's not wise to act like they are.
That puts a completely different spin on MAGA than I've heard anyone talk about...
Twitch streams help. A lot of tool skills don't get transferred because they are un-observed.
> crazy overvalued

I didn't pay too close attention to the story. If they had managed to produce the tech they claimed for the price they claimed, would $10 billion be crazy overvalued?
>It depends on the dimension you’re interested in.

Distance between what's written in the comments and the reality I personally observe, is the dimension I was thinking of.
Okay, but, it wasn't a question, there's no ? in the title.

He was writing a blog post to draw our attention to this problem, and succeeded.
Agreed. I'm torn between obtaining an isomorphic I out device... And practicality of only being to play at home :-/
Because in 2021 developer tools are fundamentally not profitable. Jetbrains is the exception, not the norm. Developer tools are loss leaders for large corporation to acquire developer goodwill and mindshare. Previously we sold developer tools/PaaS. Programmers do not like to pay for their tooling. You have to sell to management, and when your target is management, then the metrics are completely different from what developers want.

This is why no-code and low code are so much more successful than developers tooling startups in terms of revenue and profitability. The people using are the same people who are running the business. The value proposition is clear. "Better developer experience" alone is not sufficient for selling to enterprise. And programmer productivity cannot be quantified in lines of code written. This is hard point to explain and get across on HN because this forum is inherently dismissive of the value of RPA and RAD software.
You don't seriously believe this? Have you been outside in the last few months?
I don't think so: it's open ended indeed, and the wikipedia article I linked matches the latin name
Analogous to the hygiene hypothesis - that too clean an environment causes the body's immune system to respond inappropriately, causing autoimmune disorders, etc.

And maybe the Culture books are really an exploration of that idea.
You are spreading factually incorrect nuclear dogma. You're kidding yourself if you think you're not anti-nuclear. You claim this is an unsolved problem, Finland says otherwise. Moreover, deep geological storage is only needed for super long-term storage (like, long after the last humans have kicked the bucket). In the medium-term, storing high-level waste onsite is a perfectly adequate solution. The so-called waste problem is complete bullshit - there was never a problem.

My rational judgement is not in question here, but that of all anti-nuclear proponents should be. And you're right, I do have strong feelings. Can you really blame me? I'm inheriting a broken world that looks existential climate change in the face, shrugs, lights up a spliff and says "well solar is pretty cheap". We've had the technological solution to climate change in hand for 60+ years: rocks so spicy they'll power our entire civilization for millenia. Yet we (the people) got outplayed so hard by the oil lobby that not only is nuclear energy on the decline, threads like these where supposedly technologically literate people espouse greenpeace's old talking points abound. And while this baseless and frustrating 'debate' continues, the water rises.
I'm going to say https://artstation.com

In particular, I enjoy both the environmental concept art & design section and the matte painting sections:

- https://www.artstation.com/channels/environmental_concept_de...

- https://www.artstation.com/channels/matte_painting?sort_by=t...
> violent agreement

I'm using this phrase the next time my daughters are playing and they start to yell at each other.
You've apparently missed the word "either" in this clause. They get to pick how they refund.
The article explains why having a rational explanation is not enough. You may not agree but it's not as if the point is unaddressed.
Sure, and internationally I think it's a big deal. I'm certainly not going to argue that people wouldn't benefit from increased mobile bandwidth.

However, huge chunk of those people you mention are nothing like mobile only, and for many the model of heavier downloads on wifi works just fine.

My point was particularly about catering to the mobile only crowd, which is pretty small (US/ EU etc., anyway).
Another word for "Clamming Up" is "The Thermocline of Truth."

https://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/15/the-wetware-crisis-the-...

"Clamming Up" because of power dynamics is inherent to hierarchy. This is why relationships with co-founders and employees need to be nurtured carefully. It's the same set of dynamics that happen inside a band.

If you always want candid advice, honest feedback, and critical though unpleasant information to flow freely and undistorted, then you must remember that actions speak louder than words. If someone tried to tell you something you really need to hear, though you may not have wanted to hear it, what did you do? How did you react? It's not enough to just say that you're for honesty and openness. It's not enough to say you value someone's opinion. You have to actually do that!

Did you counter-attack? Did you order your underling to never speak of "it" again? Did you use the differential in power to just shut-up and shut-off? If you were asked to give a detailed account of what the other person had to say, would they be satisfied that you gave a full and fair account of what they were trying to convey? Would you even be able to recall such details, or would your account be sketchy and vague?

Paying your employees well and having a great environment is actually a double-edged sword, here. What happens, if one day, your early employee comes to you with something they know you don't want to hear, and you react badly? What if you raise your voice and manage to make them feel threatened. That employee will get the message that, despite your lip-service, you don't want to hear it. What's that employee going to do? It's not too unlikely they will "get the message" and clam up, go with the flow, and play it safe to keep their cushy 6-figure job. The flow of candid information from that employee will drop by a lot!

Now, to bring things back to the semi-political: If just having hierarchy/authority, period, can raise such sticky problems in communication and corporate epistemology, then let me ask this: What effect would granting power to accusations without evidence have? This is not an argument for the blanket elimination of accusations. Rather, it's an argument for the importance of *evidence."
> Addiction to Outrage Is Ruining Your Life

How I came to this same conclusion.

I voted for GwBush 2x. I found myself annoyed by compulsive Bush hatred; it often seemed divorced from the reasons given. However, I did come to realize that the parallels between Bush hatred and my earlier Clinton hatred were too strong to deny.

FF and Obama wins 2008. I wasn't at all happy but so be it. Fifteen minutes later - as in 15 actual minutes - red rooms exploded with threads calling for his impeachment. Why? IDK. The reasons were incoherent. More than anything, it seemed like an arms-race escalation of rage-driven thinking.

It was enough for me tho. I wanted to be done being an outrage junkie.
What is stupid about the constant railing against cancellation, when groups exist that do want to form mobs and ruin somebody's career over a comment made 10 years ago?
Oh cool!

> €2,300.00

Uhm
Funny enough, I’ve never considered the CBC an “elite” source of media and didn’t get that impression from the CBC itself. Maybe you could explain a little? I want up understand what you mean better.