skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Could you say more about this? I wasn't involved, but my recollection is that Google pioneered using a zillion low-cost nodes for search. E.g., I remember that AltaVista was using a big iron approach partly as a way of showing off DEC's wares. I can believe everybody had to try to keep up, but I am skeptical that Google slowed down enough for everybody else to catch up and/or surpass them.

It's the nature of innovation that something that puts you ahead doesn't create a sustainable advantage (e.g. AltaVista as you highlighted), and there tends to be some marginal advantage for second movers of having the benefit of hindsight. I don't know that anyone knows the why of how this played out in Google's case, basically no one is privy to all the information about each search engine's operations, and to the extent they do, they likely cannot share what they know.

Certainly, on the cost side, Google's approach wasn't entirely novel in the sense that there was a lot of expertise already out there on how to run low-cost nodes at scale. Reverse indexes are actually a pretty "embarrassingly parallel" problem, and Page Rank style algorithms don't really make it much more difficult. In short: once Google demonstrated the value of the approach, it was pretty easy to figure out how to implement it. Google certainly continued to innovate on their data center designs, but if anything were at a disadvantage in terms of rolling it out because they already had a substantial investment in their existing designs that were working pretty well for them. There were also startups like FAST (AllTheWeb) that sprung up after Google and were able to leapfrog Google much as Google leapfrogged its competitors.

In terms of relevancy, we did do double-blind style evaluations of the relevancy of search engines as well as of the consumer behaviour with search engines. What we found was that by 2004-2006, search engine competitors had largely closed the relevancy gap, and in some cases reliably exceeded Google. What we also found though was that it largely didn't matter. Even when presented with terrible results, most of the population would not switch search engines. Indeed, most of the growth in market share amongst search engines came through distribution deals where users would be presented with a search engine as the default.

Now, that's not to say that people didn't switch because they found a search engine to be better. They absolutely did.. but only 10-30% of the users would ever engage in switching behaviour for any reason. Getting those users certainly would help you, but the vast majority of the market was driven by other factors.
Everyone wants everyone else to adopt an idealistic world view while they use shrewd pragmatism to navigate life.
I am frequently surprised by the number of "dead bedrooms" I know about among friends, and I sincerely believe the problem is the western world's secretly coy perception of sex. There is a superficial surface level that is extremely wrong (for example, Successful people have sex, the most successful people have the hottest sex with the hottest partners; Sex isn't about planning it's about letting the desire overcome you; Doing this thing will make you more desirable to your partner... unless you suck; All people are secretly kinky and the happiest people figured out what makes them tick), and then there is a deeper level of taboo that discourages any honest communication about sex.

There is no panacea to this problem because it involves mutual collaboration between both members of the couple. The things that seem to work (couples therapy, self-help books) only actually work because they spark a conversation. Regardless, it always seems to involve rejecting some of those superficial notions I listed above and acknowledging that 90% of the stuff you learned or assumed about sex is wrong.

I think this is a very Americanized perspective, though, so I would be especially interested in hearing perspectives from other cultures.
We probably don’t call a dishwasher a robot because it’s not

That is the only consumer facing device you mentioned. I know we have industrial robots, so I’ll skip debating where we draw the line.

Once we get to the Apple II of home robots, consumer spending will fuel the rapid development, and “robots”, will become more intelligent and agile
But the "currently perceived reality" (eg the fact that men are now behind in terms of college graduation) is exactly what you would see once you've reached the goal.

By saying "well, they were so far ahead they have no excuse to not be better anyway" you're basically saying that you will reject potential evidence that the goal has been reached.

Maybe I misunderstood the GF's point, but it just sounds like such a lack of empathy for people who face hardship for reasons that are specific to their individuality. It's like saying "poor men are too stupid to not be poor, they have no excuse to be poor".
Because the next logical step is to allow jurisdictions (cities/counties/whatever) charge more tax on their roads.
What I'm saying below applies to the advanced liberal economies (the rest of the world is not in this place yet).

I think the intersection of feminism, women entering the workforce, globalization and the attendant economic insecurity, and the shift to a service-oriented economy (where women do much better than men) have all combined to put men in a difficult position: on average, women are feminists when it comes to power plays that pit females as a class against men (feminism is first and foremost about power, equality second), but they still expect men to be the providers (most women do not want to marry a man who makes less than them), and also expect men to do the dangerous occupations (oil rig workers, police, military, particularly infantry, waste disposal and handling, construction). Perhaps women have won a pyrrhic victory here: they have successfully risen in power, pay, education, independence, and social standing, but at what cost? The asymmetry in sexuality between the sexes has always been there, but now, there is no framework to reconcile it: traditional norms, which reconciled this at great cost to women, have now been overturned, but modern-day practices have pushed things in the opposite direction, extracting a heavy cost from men. It's difficult to say one is better than the other.
I can understand disagreeing with social signalling, but this comment tree is rife with people dismissing social signals as irrational, or completely missing the plot by pointing out that you could get a synthetic diamond for much less money. It just speaks to ignorance rather than disagreement.
I'm having trouble understanding how 100 miles from the border covers 90% of the US population?

Edit: I see - I was thinking only in terms of e.g. the Arizona southern border, however looking up the Constitution Free Zone shows that it means the entire US - California, all states connected to Cananda etc.

Eidt 2: Would this mean ALL of Hawaii is in this Constitution Free Zone?
The Diamond-Water Paradox
I'm in this area pretty often due to Chuckwalla Valley Raceway in Desert Center, Ca. There is already quite a bit of solar west of Blythe.
Carlson routinely trots out "great replacement" white supremacy talking points.

https://apnews.com/article/race-and-ethnicity-tucker-carlson...

Carlson says immigrants make America 'Poorer' and 'Dirtier' (hint: not immigrants from Norway)

https://www.newsweek.com/fox-news-tucker-carlson-migrants-di...

Carlson is one of the most popular right wing commentators in the country. His show is one of the most watched on TV. He is routinely in the top ten polled of GOP candidates for President in 2024.

You say: "No one sane opposes racial equality, conservative or liberal." You might be right, but only because there are no sane conservatives not named Mitt Romney or Liz Cheney and I think they have better things to do than hang out on HN.
Haha, loved this part:

"...young people who aren't particularly adept at any academic discipline might pick up art, music, computers..."
The People v. Bill Gates
it is, I notice that me or even people in my family who often times tend to show anticonformity behavior need some love.

Often times I wonder how would I feel if someone were to hold my hand, or give me a kiss but the feeling goes soon away perhaps dictated by the way I was raised or my own genes (something I'm can't determine since I'm not an expert neither in science or parenting)

Just to give you some context I grew up in a family with 6 uncles, 2 aunts and my mom, just one of them married, although all of them seem to fare well economically speaking.
Where's the "maturity model"?

I'm not seeing them propose any kind of "maturity model", just survey results.

It's also very annoying that as I scroll through the survey report, I get a modal popup that cannot be cleared that tells me to fill out a non-existent form.

This doesn't look like it was ready for release.
Modern feminism has actually been fairly two-faced on what it really wants. At this point, I can't tell whether feminism would prefer (given constraints only allow for one):

* Working on an issue which only helps women a bit, but doesn't help men at all

* Working on an issue which helps both women and men a lot

Considering media has a routine narrative of painting men as demons and women as angels, any claim that feminism is for anything in regards to men, might need to be backed up with some strong cases.
Absolutely not. Not that those things aren't great, and hopefully already being done, but there is zero need to ask firefighters to be at 100% utilization at all times. There is value in having some one perform busy waiting in the event of an emergency. Did you know thats a training drill they perform? How fast they can be out and on their way from the moment of getting a call.
Most charities already give you pdf certificates recording how many lives you saved with your donation. What's the point in having an NFT instead of just a pdf?
This is HN, and no-one yet mentionned the "Boimler Effect" ?
> This is basically a red flag for any relationship.

This is a very odd western view of things. None of my Bangladeshi aunts would find it at all controversial if a young man said he was sad because he was chronically unable to find a relationship. Humans are supposed to be in intimate relationships of some sort, for the purposes of making children. Friends and hobbies aren’t a replacement.

I find the ease with which people throw around “codependency” similarly perplexing. I don’t doubt that this situation exists among some people. But normal healthy marriage involves a large degree of codependency. The idea you need to be a standalone individual who would be happy with or without their spouse is inconsistent with how people actually work.
it's also a question of age I think.

what I recall from my time in my 20ies my desire to be sexually active was a lot more dominant and in charge of my higher faculties than what it is today nearing 50.

biology determines how strongly we feel we need to be with a partner I think. I accepted much more toxicity and negativity just to not be alone (allowing control by my partner over my emotions and was far more ready to compromise) than what I'm today.

Today any potential relationship needs to be solid on a mental level first before I'd even consider going further. That certainly wasn't the case in my early 20ies. Also I'm today able to spend time by myself (and not just get by but really enjoy my own company, thoughts etc ...)
It absolutely is. I'm not suggesting that Chrome was a failure by any means. I'm suggesting that it was far from a broad phenomenon that people just clicked "install" when Google launched it.
>In my experience, people who are against "equity" call it "equality of outcome" because it sounds more Orwellian/communistic/whatever your dystopian descriptor of choice is.

I call it Harrison Bergeron:

https://archive.org/stream/HarrisonBergeron/Harrison%20Berge...
> Another way to phrase the original top comment (which, btw, is very deservedly the top comment): "If you can't be happy on your own, there's no way you'll be happy with a partner."

Why does everyone in this thread like posting definitive statements like this? As if it's universally true?

Life isn't as black and white as people like to think.

I was not much of a happy person before I found my (now) wife many years ago. She helps me deal with life in a way no therapist could ever do (and vise versa, me to her). We're in it together and help each other.

I could not figure out how to be happy on my own. Once I found my partner, I was able to be happy.

This isn't universal, of course. Many people are able to be happy on their own, but it's so strange reading definitive stuff like "there's no way!" when it's just not black and white.
The article mentions that the seeding is sufficiently random so to make it unlikely to at the RNG will get fixed, but it would be cool to see more details about how you might be able to guarantee that seed so you can speed run or TAS the game.
also feel like these processes are there so when the crap hits the fan, there's a trail to see whom to point the fingers at. everyone is just trying to cover their own butts
i find it crazy that you think DOS is secure when compared to windows. or anything else, really.
What am I suppose to do all day? Work??
This is like saying your amazing lock-free architecture is scalable, as long as you define scalable to mean "at most one thread."
New York semi-recently discovered korean ingredients so Gochujang and ketchup is the new hotness for the western world.
I believe that many people _do_ want to give up independence and self-governing because it also means eschewing responsibility and accountability. It's easier to always throw blame on something else and demand someone else to fix it, than to accept that we all have our own flaws and weaknesses and that we often have to work to get where we want to.
Those are real targetable attributes under Facebook. They would be real ads if approved.
I worked at a company that set a diversity target of 33% women in tech roles. In the same all-hands that announced this target leadership said using our definition of a "tech role" 20% of the workforce was women. To achieve this, we gave women two chances to pass the pre-onsite coding interview instead of one. Sure, this isn't as forceful as a hard 50/50 quota but it is pushing the needle away from equality and towards equity. Equity taking precedence over equality is also the basis of affirmative action used by private universities. And progressive taxation.

In fact, I'm a supporter of equity over equality in plenty of instances beyond basic necessities. I think certain avenues to pursuing this are better than others, and that there are some instances where pursing equity over equality is misguided. But yes, I do believe there are instances where pursuing equity - at least in part - is better than exclusively pursuing equality.
> In that sense at least we are all feminists and men’s rights activists, but nearly 100% of everyone reading this would have felt some emotional recoil from being called at least one of those two things. Why?

I guess I fall outside that range. Do most people actually find themselves having emotional recoil here? I personally feel very much a pro-women and pro-men rights supporter. Do most people not feel like that? But see it as a women vs men and not a equal rights for all kind of thing?
>I think that's the strongest criticism of incels as well; having a romantic and sexual relationship is not a requirement for a happy life.

Strongly disagree, unless you have low testosterone. Nowhere on Earth except in possibly some religious circles do people mentally push away and control to the point of elimination from awareness their sexual desires and not suffer for it in some form. You don't need to be a Freudian to know that the drive exists and gets out, somehow. If you have a low drive, then it makes sense that it would be viewed as optional.
if one is monogamous then there is obligation or so the bible says.

we modified one but not the other. we reap what we sow.
AI was also having huge success before the last AI winter. It’s mostly a question of buzzword turnover not underlying technology.
It is nice.
Next step to remove The Fields Medal and Clay Research Award.
Those gentlemens (Fourier, Hamilton, Leibniz and Sir Isaac Newton) crying in their grave.
Efficient is very important when you are doing the same thing over and over again. If you job is to type, than the faster you type the better, and anything that gets in the way of typing is bad. If you job is to think, than the faster you think the better, anything that slows thinking is bad. If you are a programmer or manager, then you are in the later group. If you work an assembly line than it is the former.
Both you and parent are right, but you have to acknowledge that extremists and totalitarians do exist.
The author touches on knowledge management, which is one of the most interesting subjects I was able to study at uni (part of CS/SS). A kind of analogy to the techne/metis is the concept of explicit and implicit knowledge.

We codify knowledge or information into explicit knowledge such as documentation, expert systems or design. Not all knowledge lends itself to this.

Implicit knowledge is that which often require experience and learning by doing. It is hard to capture explicitly. On the one hand because the skilled individual might be unaware of the skill in action, on the other they may be unable to express it.

Various hacks are then tried to pry this valuable asset out into the open, so it can be recorded on a corporate wiki.
Humanity Does Not Need Bill Gates
> Frequently you can get the Exos drives cheaper than Ironwolf anyway.

You can. I’ve been getting the 16s and they are great but with caveats. The size makes volume creation and expansion insanely long (like a week per added drive). Not Seagate’s fault I know.
The noise. They are loud. They are either chirping away or grinding away.
I'm not OP but I also do research in ML. My research focus is identifying and preventing critical system failure so people don't die. My of my time is spent developing new techniques and then testing them against data we collect from the field.
> China - is both over regulated and is very bureaucratic.

It's complicated, but that's not a correct assessment.

China is not very much regulated at all - a regulation must be regular, but the enforcement of rules in China is anything but regular.

On one side, you have the wild west (east?) of unregulated capitalism, on the other side, you have the Party coming down with the hammer over things it doesn't like, The bureaucracy mainly serves the latter.

Obviously, this is recognized as a problem, rule of law has been the drive for years but the system cannot and does not change over a day.
>there is no practical way to “tax and redistribute” sex

This is part of the function of anti-bigamy laws and frowning upon promiscuity, is it not?
Facebook business model will not be banned as they do what services always wanted to have - a large network of wilful informants. Keep feeding them data.
Not just California and not just under the banner of "equity" either. The push for equity (meaning equality of outcomes as opposed to equality of opportunity) comes under many different brands - social justice, critical race theory (CRT), diversity/equity/inclusion (DEI), cultural competence, cultural responsiveness, and so on. Activists across the country have been pushing these agendas for years, building up to this point where any difference in performance or talent or potential is erased.

Apart from California: Seattle is trying to get rid of its gifted education programs (https://reason.com/2020/03/26/seattles-school-system-has-beg...), Virginia is trying to eliminate accelerated math courses (https://www.foxnews.com/us/virginia-accelerated-math-courses...), San Francisco ended merit-based admissions at its highest performing school (https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/S-F-school-board...), and more. Let's also not forget the corruption of school curricula to teach students activism and progressive politics, such as with Seattle's Ethnic Studies math program (https://reason.com/2019/10/22/seattle-math-oppressive-cultur...).

It's not just schools either. The adoption of DEI policies has been widespread, ranging from government agencies to private companies to nonprofits. For example, the National Education Association (NEA), the largest teacher's union and largest union in the US, holds explicit left-biased activist stances and officially advocates for social justice agendas (https://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/racial-social-just...). Tech companies like Microsoft have set explicit race-based hiring goals that are illegal (https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2020/10/06/microsoft-div...). And Biden recently issued an executive order to implement equity programs across his administration (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-action...).
I have very limited experience navigating in water but I would think collision avoidance would be an excellent reason to mandate AIS.
While the calculation of $1,235 to save a life is very good, donating blood is arguably the most efficient way to save a life since it is free.
> dead bedroom situations are always the result of one party being incapable of understanding the other's desire for sex.

Couldn't disagree more. Sexual attraction is not about 'understanding' how your partner feels. A man who is no longer attracted to his wife won't suddenly become attracted when he understands how she feels. Attraction is not a choice. It's not something you can talk yourself or someone else into.
This isn't showing up under the "ask" link above, alongside the other "Ask HN." Is this is editorial decision, or was there a step I missed? Thanks.
To me, the web page nearly is always faster than asking a human. Even setting aside the phone trees designed to slow me down, I'm more comfortable with the bloated, user-hostile page than trying to understand a human voice through a 4000 Hz telephone channel. I like not having to try to explain to them what I want. With the web I can do it whenever I want, at my own pace.

It feels like a voice call is an admission of failure: sometimes of their web interface design, sometimes of my ability to read. If I am calling on the phone it's only because I want to talk to a human being, and I want that disgusting process over with as soon as possible.

There is never anything I want from the phone tree except a human operator. If you could automate my request then you should have done it over the far clearer interface of the web page. Maybe there are some people who have a phone but not a computer, but I am not one of them. I'm only talking to you because the easier (for me) ways have failed.
FB uses a rather obscure and proprietary internal scoring system. You may be able to publish an ad campaign with lots of text once or twice, but it will make your ads account score go down and at some point it will likely be disabled - temporarily first, after one or two more incidents forever.

The recommended amount of text on the image is less than 20%. Their system also doesn't like text because of potential "circumventions of policy" with putting text in images. Weird fonts that are not machine-readable will likely get the account banned fast.
I'm very glad we're not friends.

edit: I just found this meme: https://i.imgur.com/WCzNW77.png and I decided to link it here. People think friendship is something that is built over years because it takes years in order to have finally made it through enough hardship and shared struggle so calling each other friends is justified. This is the literal meaning of having a friend. You know they'll help you even you got nothing to give and without expecting anything in return from them.
Thanks for the details !

The use case would be collaboration with people that might not be using TeXmacs themselves,(M)HTML being the document format.