skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> That's an argument from authority and is a logical fallacy.

True. And I should rightly retract and accept that shortcoming but you've provided me with no real argument other than negating mine. No examples of what you're talking about, not data point to chew on, fuck all.

It still an empty statement in and of itself.

> Different people have different goals and different aims. What meaning any particular person finds in an activity varies from person to person, and the wider and richer the activity is, the harder it is to make the case that there's only one right way to do it or that it means only one thing to everyone. Music and other arts are examples of such rich, wide-ranging activities.

Another completely empty statement. If I had a few days to live, I'd learn nothing from it. T'would be a waste of precious time and energy. Blanket statements, without form, without focus, without context are more meaningless than a false truth. Looks intelligent, but ultimately meaningless.
That's a very interesting question, but unfortunately it's not really my area.

If you'll permit me to speculate a bit:

I do clinical work as well, and I'd say that therapy produces some personality change if done long enough, but it's not a massive shift in most cases, though even small changes can make a big difference over time.

Unfortunately, trauma and hardship can also have a big impact on people's personality and average behavior. Going to war or prison or suffering great loss can have a big impact.
Quotes have many uses, but emphasis is not one of them.

Yes, but like so often with English grammar, there are exceptions. E.g., scare quotes.

https://style.mla.org/quotes-when-nothing-is-being-quoted/
I’m getting a cloudflare captcha on mobile for archive.is but it’s rendering desktop mode. So the images are off screen and I can’t proceed.
It is quite apparent that the NASA/Government space industry has milked the public for 50+ years. We could have had re-useable first and higher stages decades ago. Then along came Spacex and revealed this scandal.
What’s the difference between an emulator and a VM? You run applications for other platforms on both.

You can actually run GUI apps on it.
In the US, we still aren't free of getting called and mailed by a vehicle warranty service because your car is going to "go out of warranty soon" (total scam).
I sincerely appreciate your humility! The other commented on the cognitive load of constantly changing contexts, and that was accurate. To provide a direct response, in all of the following cases, quotes should not have been used. There are likely more but these are the few I picked:

- can be run without a “gaming-class” video card.

- the three lower “graphic detail” levels

- -on ten year-old Intel “Core II Duo” or

- comprehensive “YouTube” playlists,

- well-known “AskMisterWizard.com” web site

- Microsoft "Windows"

- YouTube "PlayList"

This one is acceptable, because you're essentially defining LAC as an acronym for the first time, and a change of context is acceptable:

LINUX Air Combat (or “LAC”)

That's not to say it's' needed. I'd have written it:

LINUX Air Combat (LAC)

or

LINUX Air Combat (henceforth referred to as “LAC”)

In another section, you wrote the following:

Overall, LAC’s features compare favorably with Windows-based flight sims from the genre’s “classic” period, like “Combat Flight Simulator 2”, or “Air Warrior III”, or “Aces High I”, or “Warbirds”.

It could have been written this way:

Overall, LAC’s features compare favorably with Windows based flight sims from the genre’s classic period, rivalling such titles as Combat Flight Simulator 2, Air Warrior III, Aces High I, and Warbirds.

Although I do not claim grammatical perfection, It think the rewritten example is more readable. But, I've seen many native English speakers/writers who'd have done it this way:

Overall, LAC’s features compare favorably with Windows based flight sims from the genre’s classic period, rivalling such titles as "Combat Flight Simulator 2", "Air Warrior III", "Aces High I", and "Warbirds".

Again, I do not claim perfection. I only care about grammar as far as it affects readability, and I'm known to take Creative License with it when I feel like it. (See what I did there?)
The Great Suspender (fork) along with saving sessions is essential for high quantities. Browsers save tab context, you can go forward and backward unlike bookmarks. Super cool for sleuthing sessions.
There are so few pins that even when hashed it would probably be easy to crack
A Successful Tragedy
Funny that you mention that, because that's exactly what inspired the word. From Wikitionary:

> Inspired by German sonder- (“special”) and French sonder (“to probe”).
Probably they were 4 years ago, but I'm not so sure now. Intel's processors require about 2x as much silicon per core (14nm vs 7nm), so if they are priced similar per core, Intel is probably getting squeezed.
Indeed, sometimes less is more. More benefit stands in for the more technical term "utilitons" or units of value or utility. Less is more is adding description to what contingently has a higher expected or observed utiliton value. Between explaining all that or using "more benefit", I opted for less ;D
You are taking PIN security too seriously, yes. Your bank doesn't store them in the clear, they store them in an encrypted form, but they are able to decrypt them. There is a huge legacy of old hardware and software in banks. Much of the PIN issue has to do with maintaining backwards compatibility with cards without chips (magnetic strips), and readers that can only read those cards. I've encountered cash machines which didn't prompt for my pin code until after my card had been returned.

Don't sweat it. This is the least of your concerns.
True, but since the author was not using them in that context, it's irrelevant in this case. :)
Hi Tom, thanks for the feedback!
Since the v1 is desktop only, building a Telegram bot was a hack to help users share resources directly from mobile - if things go right we'll build an ios app to replace the Telegram Bot!
As for podcast annotation, the third video on the LP shows how the desktop experience works - and the mobile experience is pretty similar. Did you have a different type of experience in mind for podcast annotation?
Thx!
Wait, but an argument from original intent on aluminum/aluminium would go towards using aluminum [0]. That was the original published name, and the change to "-ium" only happened shortly after. We could go even further on that route and argue that the entire pattern of ending metals in "-ium" rather than "-um" is a neologism based on a misunderstanding. Of the classical metals [1] such as gold (aurum), silver (argentum), lead (plumbum), none of them end in "-ium". So where does that come from?

The best explanation I've heard is that it comes from the timeline of when different metals were discovered [2], back in the 1700s. Magnesium was discovered, and was named after Magnesia, a region in Greece. Basically, "magnesi-" + "-um". Then Barium was discovered, and was named from the Greek "baryta", meaning "heavy". Molybdenum followed the "-um" trend, and "tungsten"/"wolfram" ignored the discussion altogether.

And now we get to the first mistake. Tellurium was named from the Greek "tellus", and should have been called "tellurum". Instead, by analogy from magnesium and barium, the suffix "-ium" was added instead. Strontium came next, after the town of Strontian. This reinforced the trend of the "-ium" suffix, even though it came from "stronti-" + "-um". By the time Zirconium was discovered from the mineral "zircon", the association was cemented. So many metals had ended with "-ium" by sheer coincidence, that people assumed that that was the correct Latin suffix.

Bringing it back to the "aluminum" vs "aluminium", this means that there's neither authorial intent nor historical consistency in the use of "aluminium". I'm fine if people think it sounds better, and argue from that, but for the love of all that is holy, people need to quit pretended that it has any more validity or correctness to it.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium#Coinage
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metals_of_antiquity
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_chemical_element_d...
No, it's about you calling someone a xenophobic bigot because they're a country bumpkin and assuming someone else is probably not a bigot because they're a city person.

Side note, you do know the definitions of the words "xenophobic" and "bigot" are right?
This is exactly what I needed! Thank you for making it and especially for talking about it publicly!

I think shameless plugs should be viewed as more positive. It's much better to find out about a product or tool in a relevant context and from the author itself instead of an Ad or blog post.
And my effective tax rate on the total my employer pays is 52% (excluding VAT), and I earn at least 6 times less than you. I’m in Europe so public services include more than the US, but paying 55% on $400k isn’t something to complain about. You’re very rich, you get taxed as such.
Also, FYI (sibling post because my first one is already locked): this isn't about what the programmer tells the compiler. It's about what the compiler can infer on its own, through dataflow analysis.

"const", as a qualifier, isn't novel information about a variable for the compiler — compilers already know whether a variable is used mutably or not, just like they know when and where a variable has its last access and goes dead.

"const" is an instruction to the compiler that if it finds, by its own independent analysis, that the variable cannot be const in that context, then the program is invalid and compilation should error out.

As such, "const" only even has a meaning, if the compiler already independently knows which declared variables are or are not const "in practice."

That information is what would be used to decide whether to do the copy.

> B could end up having to perform another copy for that call

At worst, that's no worse than what happens under the current ABI, where A passes data by value to B, which passes it by value to C.

(Do also remember, as I said in another comment, that ABIs/calling conventions are only "about" functions with external linkage. Functions with "static" linkage do whatever the compiler likes; as do their callers.)

I think, in the specific situation you're describing, there's also prelink-time cross-unit optimizations that can be done here to eliminate redundant copies even further — but that's getting close to just expecting C to do Rust-like ownership analysis, so I wouldn't claim that to be practical in any production compiler in the near future.
> - if you take "sardine" supplement pills and go on eating burgers and fries, do not expect a miracle with respect to type 2 pre-diabetes,

The way I generally describe the result of switching from no intentional diet to any trendy/FOTM/recent diet is mostly just that a person begins to give a shit about what they're eating, which results in an array of positive benefits not directly related to that diet. Ketogenic diets are a good example. People go from not caring about what they eat, regularly eating fast food, sugary snacks/drinks, deep fried carbohydrates, etc. to spending a bunch of money on expensive butter and grass fed beef. They then lose weight. Sure, ketosis is a big deal, but in reality the biggest factor in a person's weight loss/health improvement is just replacing high calorie, high sugar, high carb, high fat food with no sugar, low/no carb, reasonable calorie food. (This is not an attack on the ketogenic diet. There is plenty of research for and against it. As with all diets, if you find positive outcomes while trying it, keep doing it! The goal is health).

I think the real test would be, what positive benefits _do exist_ when a person changes nothing else but includes a pack (tin? can? box?) of high quality sardines weekly. If nothing, I feel like it kind of just falls into the category of "being specific and intentional about dietary choices brings health benefits", which isn't necessarily new or ground breaking.
MicroCenter[0] has been receiving stock for in-store purchase only.

Antonline[1] has them in stock for shipping in a bundle with a Lenovo gaming monitor.

[0]: https://www.microcenter.com/product/630282/amd-ryzen-9-5950x...

[1]: https://www.antonline.com/Lenovo/Computers/Computer_Displays...
I don't think I'd frame it that way.

SpaceX is taking advantage of technologies that weren't available until recently. Of course, now that they are available, we should see SpaceX's competition adopting them.
For data of EU citizens, up to 2% of global revenue for small violations, 4% for severe ones
He was working far into 2011, and he spent a lot of time trying to secure his legacy. Don’t tell me that he somehow missed the run-away success of the App Store and how it made the iPhone his greatest achievement as CEO and one of the biggest business successes ever.
inb4 ban.
Underrated comment. Though the "worth it" bit is the trick.

In my estimation these older parts that "just werk" should be getting inherited and iterated on as a public good.

The idea that means of production should phase into public trust tends to get everyone in a tizzy though. I'd like to see a public "foundry of last resort" that focuses on being able to make anything.
Real talk on tabs -- Tabs were always just a way for the browser to mitigate how horribly window managers handled multiple open windows at the time. IMO the OS/Distro/WM itself should be managing a global tab interface for all apps to use, rather than having app-makers needlessly reinvent the wheel over-and-over again.
An M5 is a "3.1 GHz Intel Xeon® Platinum 8175M" ($0.192 for xlarge)

while an M5a is an "AMD EPYC 7000 series processors with an all core turbo clock speed of 2.5 GHz" ($0.172 for xlarge)

which is only about 10% cheaper. But the claimed clock is 20% lower. Different IPC or sustained clock might shift the balance a bit, but it seems unlikely that AMD wins decisively on performance/cost.
Please expand then on what the causes of the famine were.
I think this year has proven that TSMC does have a very dominant position in the industry.
The underlying motor sequence is learned and probabilistic based on prior sequences that you actually played. Therefore if you introduce a mistake early it will be one of the set of motor sequences that can occur following the start of the sequence. The faster you go the less time you have to anticipate and correct an upcoming mistake. This can happen at even fairly low speeds as soon as you cross the threshold where you can no longer consciously determine what motor movement happens next in the sequence.

An extremely overly simplistic model would be something like, let's say you play a sequence 10 times and make a single mistake. You now have a 10% chance on any future run of making that mistake. However if you do, then you probability of making that mistake goes up in the future. Assume that you can reduce that 10% slighly by applying top down (conscious) attention if you play at some reasonable pace. Playing faster means that you can't use any top down feedback to reduce the probability of the incorrect sequence from occurring.

Under stress (e.g. during a competition) you may not be able to dedicate enough attention to keep the incorrect sequences in check, so the mistakes reappear at the worst possible time. This also happens if you get angry because you made a mistake.

The best way to avoid this is to never make a mistake in the first place.
Have you checked out the monthly "Ask HN: Freelancer? Seeking freelancer?" posts?

May edition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27025921

E.g. there's a 6-month opportunity for React + Django

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27040390
> we believe that human could or should act in certain ways

Are you referring to the voices in your head?

Have you noticed there are more than one voice, and sometimes they point you in different directions?

Assuming you don't speak French, Greek or Estonian, and have never read a translation of any writing by a French, Greek, or Estonian human being, how do you know whether French, Greek and Estonian people also have multiple voices in their heads like you do?

How can you know that non-human animals don't also have voices in their heads?

If non-human animals also have multiple voices in their heads suggesting different actions to them, and they make choices from those voices, how can you define them as "amoral"?
Let's not oversimplify or cast blame. Sure, most/all of the tech has been around for decades - although Lars Blackmore & the other controls engineers did original work that was arguably absolutely critical - but there hasn't been any milking going on. The most profitable route wouldv'e been to develop this tech & then use it, after all. [Case in point: SpaceX, of course.] There simply wasn't enough interest from the public or Congress to put enough R&D money into any number of cool programs to see them through to commercialization.
>wow, one wonders what the spike protein made by the covid-19 vaccines could do

Here's what it does. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.121.31890...

>presenting just a protein for the immune system to tackle instead of the whole virus is without risk.

The level of S protein produced from a vaccine is substantially less than someone infected with SARS-CoV-2. Covid-19 is not a prion disease, the protein doesn't cause any kind of catalytic misfolding of other proteins. No one said new vaccines are without risk, that's why even a one-in-a-million reaction causing blood clots was enough to halt the administration of the J&J vaccine until it could be studied further. These vaccines have been studied for over a year on a massive chunk of the world population, any kind of adverse reaction that hasn't already been caught would have to be so rare that no matter what demographic we're talking about you're at substantially greater risk of harm from Covid-19 than from any as of yet unknown side effect of any of the mainstream vaccines.
"Broadly speaking, they are more happy, successful, intelligent, creative, and popular."

This reads like an extrovert's life wish list - particularly "popular," but even "happy" and "creative." I disagree that someone who exhibits these characteristics is somehow "better" or is living a better life.
The US was a smart, well organized, helpful 3rd party entering the war from another side of the map. I'm spitballing highly here, but it feels to me like it changed the conflict from a side vs side attrition to something more dynamic & much harder to fight. The size & scale of that change doesn't necessarily have to mean that the US did most of the fighting, did the most to "win" the war, but it's substantial presence was key to changing the nature of the conflict & bringing it to a close.

Another key point to me about the US's importance in the war is something I've only heard in the last decade, from The Secret History of Silicon Valley[1][2][3]. The US's technological work in trying to learn & counter advanced German war machines seems like a crucial contribution to the war. Foiling Germany's impervious air defenses (& thwarting their bombing campaigns) is one example of the advanced signals & intelligence role that the US contributed to the war effort against the Nazis.

As the linked Quora answer points out though, the US was also making colossal material contributions to the Soviet war effort, while also running their own invasion in parallel. While also working enormously hard to keep England fighting too. In the earlier days of the ar, denying German's free reign over the Atlantic required not nearly as many lives as a ground war (but still a horrific death toll), but gracious were a lot of ships ever lost trying to bring food & supplies under the Lend Lease program, & created the war-time industry needed to eventually enter the war in full.

[1] https://steveblank.com/secret-history/

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8980498

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23569184
That's the argument usually presented for intelligence testing.
Yes, of course it is. Working out how to work with people is the core competency of most jobs. In this case, if you've worked out how to give the 'correct' answers on such a test, then you've got a good start on knowing how to navigate the corporate machine - and get your real job done despite corporate garbage (which in my opinion is what makes it ethically ok).
I meant the parts that are not common enough to have pin-compatible substitutes from multiple vendors. I have worked with people way above hobbyist level and it is those obnoxious non-standard parts that are the ones that suddenly go out of stock everywhere even if they aren't actually obsoleted. Sometimes they just haven't done a run manufacturing that part number in a while and the stock ran out.

I've seen this happen with everyone from ST to Microchip to Atmel (when it existed) to Qualcomm to Analog Devices (though interestingly never Texas Instruments so far); this is just something that happens...

Thank you for the clarification, my initial comment was flippant and needed like four paragraphs of caveats.
I think it's even simpler than that: making software leaner doesn't bring in much money. Making more features does. Selling more hardware does.
I'll cape up for blind spot detection. My current car doesn't have it and I out-of-the-box I found that I had to move pretty extensively to see things that are to my 5 or 7 o'clock; even with my mirrors correctly positioned there's a gap between what I can easily perceive from the wing mirror and from the rear mirror and I had to buy blind spot mirrors to compensate. (It's much better with them.)

The car isn't even that long--the back pillars and back window are just weird (Hyundai Veloster).
'Incognito' implies anonymity. The clear suggestion is that people who already know who you are (your ISP, or your employer/school who is equivalently knowledgeable) can see your browsing, but that websites will see you as an anonymous person unless you choose to identify yourself to them.

There's a reason Google don't mention their own collection/inferential behavior here; people might abandon Chrome is it said 'BTW if we can work out who you are at the server end we'll still be tracking that.'

It may boil down to determinations of what 'a reasonable person' believes, that is someone who is amenable to reasoned argument, and of ordinary knowledge. I think a lot of people here are projecting their technical knowledge into this page and saying 'if you don't consider all these background factors then that's your problem.' It seems like to me that a court will lean towards taking the above at face value absent specific knowledge to the contrary, eg choosing to log into an online service vs not.

A simple example would be doing some Super Secret Stuff in one incognito window and opening up another tab where you go to Youtube (also incognito), don't log in, but play your three favorite and quite unusual songs for background music. Is it OK for Youtube to silently infer that it's you based on that highly individual selection and allow Google to track your Super Secret activity with 99.9% confidence?
But what exactly “no”?

No, we there’s no mechanisms behind reciprocal smiles for instance?

Or no, they don’t play role in our survival?

Or no, we shouldn’t respect them?
Come to texas. Everyone has a truck, including me. But I bought the smallest one i could with a diesel to get 30mpg+ and its still the size of a 2009 F150.
Every continent has some Neanderthal DNA flowing around. Neanderthals were all over Eurasia, and some of their hybrid descendants moved to Africa.

https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/everyone-has-n...