skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The framing of "just asking questions" as something insidious is insidious.

People should be allowed to ask questions. It's only when they do that we get good answers. In the absence of dispute, everything, even a fact, is reduced to dogma.

These days J.S. Mill is often framed (by those arguing against free speech) as saying that "free speech leads to truth". But Mill was no fool and that was not his argument. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty:

> First, if any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility. Secondly, though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied. Thirdly, even if the received opinion be not only true, but the whole truth; unless it is suffered to be, and actually is, vigorously and earnestly contested, it will, by most of those who receive it, be held in the manner of a prejudice, with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds. And not only this, but, fourthly, the meaning of the doctrine itself will be in danger of being lost, or enfeebled, and deprived of its vital effect on the character and conduct: the dogma becoming a mere formal profession, inefficacious for good, but cumbering the ground, and preventing the growth of any real and heartfelt conviction, from reason or personal experience.

Mill says that, without disputation, we cannot get to truth. This is not the same as saying that disputation will always lead to truth. Mill also makes an important distinction (that we no longer recognize) between correct opinion and correct opinion that is rationally grounded.
Interesting variation on circular queue. It looks like it is mostly useful when the size of the data chunk varies, but the consumer never reads across the boundry of a chunk. Something like variable length packets/messages would be a good fit. If the data chunk size was fixed, you could just size you circular queue to be a multiple of that. And I can't think of anyway to ensure contiguous memory if the consumers' read sizes are not aligned with the producer's write sizes something I encounter frequently with streaming data architectures (like gnuradio for example) where the ideal chunk size varies between the different algorithms in different processing nodes in the pipeline.
Until after C++11, ternary was the only way to use "if then" in constexpr functions. So it has slightly more use from a C++ point of view.
This generation has experienced an unprecedented amount of isolation from danger and I think we are far closer to a state where we need to be more exposed to the lessons those dangers teach than we are to being over-exposed
These days I'd be more inclined to believe a corporation got paid 65bn to clean up it's own mess than they paid 65bn to do it.
> 1. You restated the above commenter's cost from $10/month to $10/year for some reason.

Parent's comment originally read $10/year.

> For context, Google's annual revenue seems to be $180B. That makes $10/month far closer to the likely alternative

I don't see how the first part of your statement at all supports the second. Google's revenue now, with many different services in wildly varying stages of profitability, has very little connection to the hypothetical subscription price that would be applied to a service that is now ad-funded - you seem to be engaging in wild speculation.

> 2. That $10/year or $10/month "disappears into the background" for you.

First, YouTube is a luxury service. Second, I specifically addressed the problem of "it's too expensive" later on in my comment, with "That's a price problem, not a pricing model problem." - which still holds. Third, market segmentation is a thing. Fourth, those in the developing world will pay with their personal information - which can be far more devastating if e.g. they're a dissident living in an oppressive regime. Fifth, I never said the ad model should be removed.

You seem to be making the assumption that I am suggesting that the ad-funded model be replaced with the subscription/microtransaction models - I do not, and my comment was carefully worded to not make that claim. I specifically believe that models where payment is made in money should always be available, with ads as an option - not that the former should be completely removed.

> paying for any service is a huge point of friction

False. I can relatively easily design a microtransaction service that has very little friction for payment. Meanwhile, there already exist many extremely low-friction payment services. If you have a credit card in the US with the new contactless payment technology, it's extremely easy to pay for things - you just swipe your card. If you have a Google Play account, it's similarly easy to purchase a new app. If you have a subscription service with auto-renew, paying for another month/year is literally frictionless - there's absolutely no interaction necessary.

> But it seems convenient and disingenuous to overlook the benefits as they're inconvenient to a shallow anti-advertising diatribe.

See previous statement about your mistaken assumption that I said that advertising should be eliminated. Attacking a strawman does nobody any good.
Actually you raise a good point - I also did a short bribery and corruption self-driven training thing at IBM, and that one was at least interesting.

The “Active Shooter” one at JPMC was somewhat sobering.
It makes all the difference whether you ban speech by content from a particular forum, or try to ban it everywhere. The latter is poisonous and counterproductive even when the content in question really is wrong and vile. By my skim of this article it explained the former kind of ban and then slid straight to advocating the latter.
SSD thermal throttle the controller =not= the NAND, itself... which actually doesn't even like to be cold.
Incidentally I was just on the Ebay website and looking through the settings since it's been a while. I thought I'd activate 2FA, but when I saw that they only offer SMS and via their app, I discarded the idea.
Institutions have added over $90B of Bitcoin to their holdings this year
Probably because it reduces the amount of said "thought leaders" on other platforms. In my opinion, the signal-to-noise ratio isn't great.
It's because the knowledge isn't that valuable usually. It's prized because of its exclusiveness. Most anyone who describes themself as a thought leader is probably full of hot air.

A more cynical person might suggest it's like how much of the success attributed to college isn't what one learns as much as the connections one makes.
Show HN: Shipped Brain – Free and Serverless Amazon Sagemaker Alternative
It's curious that neither the OP nor the comments address the incentives funding via advertising creates. While I strongly agree about issues surrounding the data collection and tracking systems used to target ads, I'm thinking about the publisher's side.

For a subscription service (paywalled), users are making an up-front decision to pay for the content an outlet publishes because they believe in some sense that the writing is worth it. This is a pretty intellectual thing to do, since you have to actually enter payment details and select a plan. It's fundamentally a premeditated act.

The advertising-based model is closer to the lizard-brain, I think. To a first approximation, it seems that ad-based funding created the whole world of "click bait": low quality articles with catchy headlines designed to increase ad views by tapping into peoples' curiosity. This model is the opposite of premeditated: it's almost subconscious and driven by moment-to-moment impulse. And I think web-based advertising incentivizes this greatly, to the point that the low-quality content designed to be engaged with impulsively is driving who gets elected.

I don't have high conviction that my thinking here is correct, but the dots do seem to connect, and I don't see it discussed much. I raise it here because while I abhor the data gathering associated with ad targeting, if I'm honest with myself, I think the harm coming from click-bait content online is more tangible today than the harm from the data collection.
But ads are the problem. Ads are the robbery of your time and attention. On a screen they steal screen real estate, consume CPU cycles, consume bandwidth, etc. And all of the stalking and tracking is a direct consequence of ads themselves, further cementing ads as the problem.

One of the other replies note that podcasts do ads right. I hugely disagree. Not only does it steal the listener's time and focus (presuming they don't just scrub past it, which I presume most people do unless they put little value on their own time, and think a host is being sincere when they pitch some snake-oil supplement, pillow or VPN), it puts a dirty veneer over the whole realm where everyone becomes half-bit hucksters.
There’s a little known trick for making the iPhone screen less bright than the lowest level of brightness: go to Accessibility, Zoom, set Zoom level to 100% (none), then enable a Zoom filter for brightness. Then when you enable Zoom (I set mine to be the triple-click shortcut), it makes the screen really dim.

I use this every night and usually first thing in the morning as well.
I can’t imagine it’s a lack of engineers. They’ve raised over $100m dollars. That’s a lot of well paid engineers. https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/clubhouse-voice
I feel the same, actually. I'm a Marxist. I often get downvoted for mentioning something about socialism or social justice in general. I believe many of those downvotes are because the community here is not particularly fond of that ideology.

I get it. I'm not particularly fond of lots of ideologies. But I don't have tools here to differentiate between, "I disagree" and "Your comment is structurally bad (rude/breaks the rules/is low effort/etc."

I think we'd both benefit from breaking the coupling between those two reasons to downvote. (And yes, I'm aware that downvoting because you disagree is against the rules, but I don't think that stops anyone. :D )
> don't track every single fucking thing I do online to do it.

Yes. However...

I have found 0.001% of what I wanted because of an ad. That's something like one item in a decade. I don't think that's worth the costs of tracking to privacy and bandwidth. Certainly not worth the obtrusiveness of contemporary ad space which is the result of the inevitable runaway arms race between the flitting attention of users and the desperate need of businesses to sale their wares.

I don't see any resolution to the waste other than abandoning tracking for ads. Good enough demographics can be found by the content being consumed. Please, let's leave it at that.
Is there any LEGAL way I can build my startup using independent contractors?
So I’m building a startup around a weekly/recurring service in the pet industry

We started out subcontracting the fulfillment to other companies in related industries and while it’s going ok we are finding that the businesses pull out when we get too many customers for them and when it starts competing with their core business in terms of time.

The original idea of partnering with and subcontracting the work to existing, well established businesses was to leverage their payroll, insurance, employees, management structure, etc. so we wouldn’t have to build from
scratch

After doing a successful test launch in a small market in Florida with a relatively established but small company we just launched in Boston last week with a large company and hit almost 60 customers in a few days only for them to back out and leave us with 60 angry dog owners who we had to cancel on.

The reason for backing out was that our customers were taking too much of his time away from his main business

My mentors and investors are urging me (more like demanding) to adopt a model similar to Wag, Instacart, Rover, etc. and build the company with independent contractors.

Maybe I’m paranoid but I’m scared to death of going down this route because of all the lawsuits around using independent contractors.

Is there ANY way of doing this legally and in a way that doesn’t open me/the company up to lawsuits?
Viewing everything skeptically causes one to doubt things that are true, and also to doubt that things that are false are really false. That results in undermining the truth and reinforcing the lie. Everything becomes an undifferentiated "shrug?" and important beliefs stop feeling as if they're worth defending.

But it turns out that most of us want to have strong beliefs after all. So, after our commitment to democratic principles (along with everything else) has been weakened due to the skeptical paradigm, we are ripe to have other strong beliefs take the place of those which have been dethroned. Enter fascism, evangelism, and other belief systems with highly dedicated cadres. They're like opportunistic infections which take root when our natural bullshit-detecting immune systems have been destroyed by a diet of excess skepticism.
If Go does have some kind of "__builtin_expect" equivalent, I can't find it.

I'd say it probably doesn't exist. Even if it _did_ exist, the Go compiler authors would reserve it for internal use only, like they do with most other Go compiler directives.
Basecamp Folds on Non-Woke Workplace Policy, Suspends Exec
I guess the price for communism, corruption, mismanagement, censorship it way higher than nuclear energy.

But, hey what do I know, experienced Chernobyl when it happened.
> Typically, the vendor doesn't just get that you are interested in cars, they get the full URL of the page you are on.

I'd say that knowing you're interested in cars is also a violation of your privacy. Knowing that people that are in car festivals may be interested in cars is ok, but knowing that a person attended to a car festival is not ok.
"self-preservation" includes social animals.

Some animals are social by nature, correct. Whether or not they have evolved to become social, being social increases their odds of survival, due to economic factors such as pooling of resources [1].

Without survival, there is no animal. Hence it is the basal need.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pooling_(resource_management)
I do understand the concept. You have not changed my understanding with this description.

If I am suffering a delusion, and you know that, then you know that I am not mentally competent. You know that, if I agree to something, I do not correctly understand what I am agreeing to. Any expression of consent you extract from me is invalid.
You are making it all about money but things like reputation, legacy, and ego can easily be "skin in the game".
If a little speaker starts playing the sounds of the ocean 2 hours before you want to go to sleep, or a little bell starts ringing, or the smell of almonds wafts through the air, or you set an alarm 2 hours beforehand and slap a yellow sticker on your left wrist. Or anything else that isn't overly annoying and yet noticeable - that would probably have the same effect. All you really need is for something to be informing you, continuously but not invasively, that you need to start winding things down and to not start up anything that gets you pumped back up.

In that sense, nightshift, etc – are overengineered lies. Placebo effect. The results are real, but they are because you've decided you want to go to bed at a certain time, and you don't want to wind yourself up in the hour or two before that moment. All you really need is a reminder. Any reminder.

The 'science' behind the effect of blue light on your sleep is probably complete hogwash (it was always dubious, and unless the linked-to experiment is a statistical fluke, a lie, or seriously mismanaged - very hard to continue to support). But you don't need such fancy things. All you really need is a function that stops you from 'winding up' in the 2 hours before sleep. Anything will do. Shifting the colours on the screen is one of a billion ways that works.
A large portion of most professions is basically debugging and reverse engineering :) (including non-technical ones, like psychology or law)
I would add Andreas Antonopoulos's video, as well as the What Bitcoin Did podcast as good starting points. Also check out the book, Inventing Bitcoin.
"Rylek dryly remembers a then-typical experience with magazine program listings"

Ahh, yep. I remember the fun of typing lots of BASIC DATA line entries from a magazine into my C64, and getting something very unexpected, and no obvious way to find/fix the typo. Getting a VicModem was a godsend, so I could just download things and go.
So, given a decade or two, "Manufacturing mRNA vaccines _will likely be_ surprisingly straightforward and widespread" ? And that will be a big deal.
I came here to say this. I don't think that advertising is inherently unethical, but profit makes unethical behavior in advertising inevitable. The article talks about the scenario where I have a product that I think people will want but don't know about, so I'm giving them information about it. Win/win/win -- the site gets some money for the work they put into the content that they care about, I get (net positive) money from my customer, the customer gets a product that they wanted anyway, and access to the site they were interested in reading. But it's almost always more like I have some money and want more, and it's much more profitable to use shady means to manipulate people who don't really want my product that they do, so I will pay site owners to facilitate the manipulation, both by giving me user data and optimizing for their attention instead of the content that they care about (more manipulation), and the user/customer loses many times over, because they have a product that they didn't want, paid more for it than it was worth, had degraded browsing experience of the content they were interested in, and have sacrificed privacy in the process.
Indeed. Western European leftism of recent decades has largely been the legacy of May 1968 (and its failure). What is noteworthy about the ideological debates of May 1968 is what they were not about: no interest in trans rights – even gay liberation and a new wave of feminism were only dawning at the time – and racial conflicts were not understood in the same way as they currently are in the USA. Thus not only does American leftwing politics have a distinctive set of concerns, but it is even imported into Europe as a new kind of leftwing politics different from the old. (And it is a bit surreal to see the occasional suggestion that people dedicated to the May 1968 ideals are "fascist", when that whole movement saw itself as a battle against fascism.)
On the other side: the browser. You're not at the mercy of what web designers are giving you.

In Firefox: Options – Language and Appearance – Fonts and Colors – Advanced… – Disable “Allow pages to choose their own fonts, instead of your selections above”

It's what I've been using for months now (and I also block web fonts using Firefox Focus' extension in iOS/iPadOS Safari). And that's even though I'm a typography geek, and have bought fonts.

Looks weird for a day or two, after that you never miss web fonts.

Make sure to select a nice default font (for example, Verdana is nice, but I'm German, and Verdana does not have a closing quotation mark for German – it's another one than is in use in English).

My setting is Constantia as default font and serif, Segoe UI as sans-serif, and Consolas as monospace.
Google Sheets is basically magic
So a lot of this is wrong but irrelevant to this so I won't touch it.

The main thing you seem to be missing though is that the subreddit is not meant to be a neutral ground for people to compare and discuss ideas.

It's a place to get concrete, consensus- and literature-based answers from people with real experience and practice at history. Having people in the comments presenting ahistorical information entirely outside of scholarly consensus only detracts from that goal.

So even if you consider this _only_ a power-vs-speech thing, there's still a strong argument that moderation is the correct step. When conversations detract from the stated purpose of the community they are restricted. Same as right here actually.
Bravo. It's weird sort of moral pretzel to advertise your donations which simultaneously wins you some respect and a whole lot of antipathy for being self-righteous. Unfortunately there's no way I know of to self-advertise your donations without being self-righteous but it's the right thing to do. Ironically you find yourself wondering do you pay more with your pocketbook for the charity or more with your social capital for the charity advertisement (which makes the charity more impactful).

By the way I don't donate anything to charity at the moment, although I plan to someday. So I'm speaking from a no-skin-in-the-game perspective.
> The big problem here was that, early on, nobody knew exactly how the virus spread. So, in the interest of caution, they picked the worst case scenario, aerosol transmission, and speculated based on that assumption. And a cloth or surgical mask probably won't protect the wearer very well in that case. But it turns out that droplet transmission seems to be the better model.

So close but so far.

At a minimum please give https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... a read. The real story is that SARS-2 does spread through aerosols whereas droplet transmission is pure unproven dogma. The paper I linked goes into some reasons why that is the case (for ex the fact that transmission is more likely close to someone doesn’t actually provide strong evidence for droplet xmission)

EDIT: I should add that even if it were primarily droplet transmission - which I very much doubt - masking would likely still fail for the stated goal (source control) in a community setting due to improper usage. And improper usage doesn't just mean "the mask is below your nose", it means "you're not changing out the mask the moment it gets damp", "you're touching your mask with unwashed hands", "you're touching your hands with unwashed mask", "you're standing closer to your conversational partner to compensate for the fact that masks muffle hearing" (<--this last one isn't "improper usage" so much as an inevitable result but I digress). And this is all without discussing any of the various negatives of mask-wearing that it's become trendy to pretend literally don't exist.

But to your point, you already correctly hinted at the fact that if aerosol transmission is the dominant transmission mode, then masks don't work even in theory, let alone in practice.
You don't have to that far. In Mexico there are plenty of remote communities as well. They don't get their mail delivered though.
Brilliant work, my initial thoughts are that it might be significantly less work to patch/seal/address the leaks in the hull than to engineer, build, install, monitor the electronics for this. Is this not the case?