skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The S3 bucket is hosted/managed by the U.S. Geological Survey. The only costs borne by them are the hosting, S3 requests, and S3 egress. In this case there's no egress since I fetch from the same region, so the marginal cost of this experiment to them is roughly $0.000001 per tile a user loads.

They've chosen to leave this particular bucket fully public for the time being. If usage got too high, they could convert the bucket to a requester pays bucket, where the requester (me) would pay for the S3 requests and egress. They've done this for their Landsat bucket (usgs-landsat), which is set as requester pays.
Yes. He used to be a zip line guide, so I’m assuming it ain’t much.
Incorrect, but a common misconception. The Amazon is destroyed to grow soya crops for 2-3 years. After the land has been depleted by soya growth, the farmers will put cattle on it for tax/legal reasons and because they can get a bit more money out of it. The vast majority of the economy impetus for rainforest destruction is due to demand for soy.

Vegetable activists often attempt to divert blame to meat production by saying things like "70% of the amazon soy is used to feed cattle", which is true, but only by mass. Cattle are fed the byproducts of soy production like soy meal that humans refuse to eat. By dollar value, almost all of the soy produced goes to human consumption.
>Cattle grazing causes less animal death than industrial plant agriculture (land clearing, pest control, insecticide usage, etc.).

Even grass fed beef are fed fodder which is the result of industrial plant agriculture.

>No they don't. Healthy vegans are few and far between.

Yes they do. Healthy vegans are way more common than you think. There is nothing unique about meat that can't be obtained from plant-based foods.
Sorry, I can't resist... I just noticed from the URL that my comment was the 9,224th item ever on Hacker News. Hacker News was a very different place back then. YC wasn't well known at all. Hell, the iPhone hadn't been released yet. We still had to walk uphill both ways to get to school and back.

Few seem to consider that contextual difference. Poor word choice aside for a moment, "quite trivially" meant something very different in 2007 than it has come to mean today.
is as simple as when you need people to constantly scheduling for hour long non pro live talk shows, it isn’t gonna work. You may get a few heavy hitters, but most are just random people chiming in. The drop off is high.
I don't trust Google to fill this role of being arbiter of access to things.

After it took me a week to recover access to a GSuite account that I knew the password for (long, unique, stored in a password manager), that I could confirm access via the recovery email, and that had my phone number attached - but Google were insisting that I was a hacker, and Support-robots refused to help me or assign a human until I found the secret Konami Code that summoned a human.

That experience was exceedingly frustrating, and has killed the last ounce of trust I have for them to do anything for which I might rely on.

While they have neat technology, if you fall into one of the cracks, it's near impossible to get support.
So your priorities are to be

1. selfish asshole

2. selfish asshole

3. globally conscious

and not listed (no importance):

4. against animal cruelty

Good to know, thanks for sharing.
I don't know about this suggestion - the linked article gave me a much better idea of the language, and why I would care about it, than the homepage does.
That’s a good point—there is a difference between knowledge you’d want policymakers and academics to be thinking about, versus how you socialize children to view the world to maximize their individual potential.
Yes that one, thanks!
This argument - which I see often - ignores that land doesn’t have to be used for growing crops or grazing. Leaving some land wild allows biodiversity which has quite literally unquantifiable benefits now and far into the future. Using less land in total let’s us leave more land wild, and/or to put solar panels on it, or put it to other uses that may be beneficial.

Further, some of that land which is unsuitable for growing crops used to be - and was degraded by growing crops or grazing. Further degrading and depleting it doesn’t do us any favors.
> However, agriculture uses 80% of the state's water.

This is what economists sometimes call a stock-flow inconsistent argument. Water, like money, circulates, and to stick your finger on one part of that chain and insist that something is being used by X and thus not available for Y does more to obfuscate than enlighten. Some of the water "spent" on agriculture then evaporates into the air and ends up as snowfall where it is "spent again" on skiing, and then it melts and travels down a river and lands in hetch-hetchy where it is "spent" on someone in San Francisco taking a shower. Things like subsidies matter, government's role in diverting water from A to B matters. But just as more rains fall on rural areas than urban areas, you will see more water used to support agriculture than to support cities. That does not mean that anyone is taking away anyone's else water and using it up for some nefarious purpose.
I’m more of a porter and stout fan, but I’ll give a good IPA a try.
How to survive a toxic workplace and how to avoid creating one
> official certifications which employers check

Yet I wangled a job writing software despite a mechanical engineering job achieved without CS courses. I also know several people at Microsoft in programming jobs who had no college experience. There are tens of thousands of employers, all different. You can even start your own business doing programming, EE design, whatever.

> apparently worthless

Not at all. It's maybe a harder road, sure, but it's navigable for those who want to do it for free.
Plants don't want to die either, and they do their best to evolve specifically to avoid death.
how is that relevant here and not other comments here?
Which I found by observing that the file name is "vinland_saga.gif" when I went to try putting the image in a search engine.
All food is processed. Cows are genetically engineered. There's no reason to be afraid of simple chemistry. Cranks like Michael Polian have made a fortune selling FUD with no science. Just read a label. Boxed food with a ton of salt and sugar is probably not good for you whether it's corn syrup or agave nectar. Similarly, boxed fiber and protein is perfectly fine. Buying locally is not scalable and fails to take advantage of the climate advantage of different geographies.
Have you tried one? This just isn't true. They taste slightly different, but definitely not "less".

If you do it right -- get a nice crust on there, don't overcook it, toast up some decent buns in butter and use good pickles, cheese, etc. -- it's every bit as flavorful and indulgent as a beef burger. (a decent one at least... you're not going to replicate the best of the best, nor should that really the goal)
S3 isn't a server, it's an object store. This uses Lambda (the serverless part) to fetch source data on demand, combine, reproject to web mercator, and send to the client.

There are varied definitions of serverless; it isn't "as serverless" as the browser loading data directly from S3, but an AWS marketing person would call this usage of Lambda serverless.
Landing humans places doesn't do much to inspire science spending either. Congress lost interest in manned spaceflight after Apollo 11 landed. The public at large lost interest until the drama around Apollo 13 and then lost it again after they landed successfully. In the eyes of Congress the Space Shuttle was a multi-state jobs program and the public at large mostly ignored it unless some astronauts died.

I'm not against manned spaceflight at all but I think it's important to recognize it is very expensive per quanta of scientific data. In a world where money for pure science can be hard to come by it's often better to get more science bang for your space bucks.
They are real commenters but they’re in a game to say the most provocative stuff they can in a pseudonymous forum.
yet not even one whistleblower has stepped forward? Not one person has been able to detect something which would be so obviously detectable? Come on, man.
Suicidal behavior in humans and other animals suggests that this is not always true.
> Before his death Hans Rosling did some great talks

You're saying it like his talks got worse after him passing away, lol.
I was interviewed for a job by a robot. Here’s how it went
> Buying something you neither need nor want is bad. Allowing something to manipulate you to want more stuff seems bad compared to it not happening.

Okay, those are the qualifiers I was looking for. That makes sense. It sounded like you were taking a stance against all purchases and not just excesses.
> Wells generally tap flowing water even if it’s simply not obvious that’s what’s going on. Basically, the ground can only hold so much water and it normally absorbs excess from rain which eventually flows into streams etc.

This was news to me, thank you. Do you have a source for further reading?
I don't get the feel that you're having a go, no worries :)

I think there are two parts to this: we can't raise the animals that folks want to eat without _also_ growing plants to feed those animals, so from my perspective it seems that we can apply most or all points about the negatives of cropping to the cropping that is done to support animal agriculture. So if cropping is bad, it's still bad when we do it for the animals we intend to eat.

Secondly, and this is argument I don't make often because its _really_ not popular (but you seem like a great person so I'm happy to share!), I just don't think animals exist to provide or serve us. They are their own beings, and we are ours. Personally, I don't care if someone treats their animals like absolute royalty. If we kill them, or we forcibly impregnate them and remove their children so we can have their milk, it's wrong to me. But again, this is not an argument many people are swayed by, so I don't generally mention it.
You don't need a humanities degree to document your local coal mine's history or contribute to your local art culture. You do need a STEM degree if you are going to serve your local community as e.g. a doctor or an engineer.

I'm not commenting on the relative value of the endeavors, just pointing out that there are opportunity costs associated with choosing a humanities degree over a STEM degree in our current environment.
All your food started in the heart of a star. What's a few more steps.
Isn't this true of most viral DNA? Could have sworn its been documented that a decent portion of human DNA has viral origins
I don't care what kind of computer you have.

Back up your shit.
There is nothing like "surviving a toxic workplace". I have been there, and it was a nightmare.
That's not exactly correct.

Here is a snippet from an interview of B's creator, Ken Thompson in 1989, explaining this:

"MSM: Did you develop B?

Thompson: I did B.

MSM: As a subset of BCPL

Thompson: It wasn't a subset. It was almost exactly the same. It was a interpreter instead of a compiler. It had two passes. One went into intermediate language and which one was the interpreter of the intermediate language. Dennis wrote a compiler for B, that worked out of the intermediate language."

~ https://www.princeton.edu/~hos/mike/transcripts/thompson.htm
This doesn't make sense - often times we are powerless. No amount of "not being a victim" is going to bring back your husband who died in a car accident, or a soldier who died in war, nor is being a victim either.
I have thought, in my experience, that the c-suite would be smart enough and savvy enough to see this, and even be incentivized to do something about it, but...maybe not. It's kind of the water we swim in, after all. I recall once having the elevator door open as I was about to rush out, only to be blocked an entourage of peeps surrounding one of the founders about to step in...
Agreed. The fate of really interesting cities like Baltimore is this weird intersection of politics, policy and economics. It seems so wasteful and needless.
> Even grass fed beef are fed fodder which is the result of industrial plant agriculture.

Cattle are fed the byproducts of human agriculture that humans refuse to eat. Anything else cattle are fed (scrubland plants, grass, etc.) is extremely low-impact.

> Healthy vegans are way more common than you think.

The vast majority of vegans I know are clearly malnourished. Only the ones who exhibit fairly herculean effort manage to maintain a good physique. OTOH, the vast majority of people I know who maintain an extremely animal-heavy (or animal-exclusive) diet show visible indicators of extremely good health (good skin condition, high muscle mass, good bone development, good teeth, etc.)

> There is nothing unique about meat that can't be obtained from plant-based foods.

Nutrition science is not at a state where we can make this statement conclusively, but what we do know conclusively is that it's at least extremely difficult to get a complete nutritional profile from plants, whereas it's very easy to do so from animal products.
I remember being one of the first adopters of chrome back when it launched and how great it was. A few years ago I moved back to Firefox. Mozilla has done a great job since then to close the gap and Firefox is better than ever
Which seems to be next to nothing.
That treatment by the way, is extremely problematic. White people are empowered to amplify people like Ilhan Omar, who are extremely unrepresentative of their group, but are discouraged from amplifying people like my dad, a Biden voting Bangladeshi immigrant who hates being called a “hyphenated American” and wants to live in a “colorblind” society.
The things happening on LiveLeak would happen anyway but the videotaping wouldn’t happen without an audience.
>youtube: it was amazing that you could easily stream videos for free and search them. There was also a ton of copyright stuff in the early days.

Hosting videos back then required plugins on the part of the viewer, which was something we were all cautioned not to download because of security.... Youtube was the first site that broke through the ice and had enough content to start taking advantage of network effects, and didn't blow that lead.
Agreed. I think the real use for NFT is tradable identities/roles, which grant access to digital or physical experiences that span organizations. Remains to be seen whether someone builds a killer app/experience around that. So far, people are only interested in mundane simulation of physical scarcity.
Probably soon if this comes to Android, since it basically removes all value from YouTube Premium as it is right now.

Google never allowed alternative YouTube clients that had this exact feature set on the play store.
I have a symmetrical background and experience (ty OP for sharing, I never talk about it, it's hard!), and...right or wrong...I just tell myself they went through a shorter road than I did, so I have a learned bias to being 'anxious' and nailing down every detail

I had to win a ton of coin flips to get here, and thinking and planning and caring about perception was something I did to maximize my chances, and they didn't/didn't have to.

I try to manage the resultant base day-to-day anxiety by noting they don't care as much as I do, they're more secure, and also noting it's a bit of a 'superpower' - I tend to be better at disappearing into esoteric subjects and reappearing in a couple months with a pristine, novel, solution to a big problem, because I obsess and master every detail.
Funny, more users is exactly what they need.
I believe that this will not be too GPU-intensive, but that will of course depend on the input resolution of the video.
Never thought about it that way. I guess wanting to be healthy is selfish.
Have you tried /g yet?
>With Netflix they have to strike a balance, though. Someone who watches Netflix 8 hours a day is going to cost them more in royalties than someone who watches 8 hours a week.

Does Netflix license content on a per play basis? All the info over the years I’ve read, although not official, indicate they were paying the content owners a flat amount for a certain time period.

For example

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/04/business/media/netflix-fr...
The first line you quote is in a section defining rights for Internal Use (Section 2.1.a) If you are providing access to your customers, it's not internal use.

The second quote is about providing access to customers (Section 2.1.b). Note it certainly allows SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, DELETEs (those are DML operations), it prohibits you from allowing customers to do things like `CREATE TABLE` (those are DDL operations).

https://www.timescale.com/legal/licenses#section-2-1-grant

This is our approach to define what it means to provide "TimescaleDB-as-a-Service" from a more technical perspective, that hopefully a developer can grok, as opposed to just stating something about "you can't compete", which is open to broader interpretation.
Well said! I am a vegetarian for much the same reasons. I think that compassion is a solid reason beyond the environmental and health reasons. As technology enthusiasts we should be driving new ways of producing food that cause the least harm.
1000 word opinion piece and not one mention of the Delta Smelt?

The author is right though, this climate is the norm. A better way to put it is that California has always been in drought. So when politicians say "drought", they actually mean "deficit". There's more than enough rain and snowpack, but we're not collecting enough of it to meet demand. We could collect more--at great expense--or use less.

As i mentioned with my opening quip, something like 50% of the water that we could collect is allowed to run into the sea. The somewhat infamous reason for this is the endangered Delta Smelt. The truth though is that there's actually no limit to the water that would be used. Growers would still be demanding more. We allow the creation of billionaires on water rights here, through the growing of insanely water-needy crops like almonds[1].

Whenever this subject comes up, I recommend reading "Cadillac Desert". It really opened my eyes about the history and politics of water in the West. The "drought" talk is all kind of a scam, and it's good to see articles that kind of hit on that.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stewart_Resnick
I think we'll eventually be able to recreate "meat" that is equal to or even better than meat that came from an actual animal. We'll reach a point where "fake" meat tastes better, is healthier for you, and, most importantly of all, is more profitable.
If you watch the footage of pigs being half-stunned, throats slit, and then drowning in a vat of hot blood, and can earnestly tell me you don't see that as cruel, I promise you I will never make that argument again.
My diet is basically dried meats, cheese and olives. I will probably have a heart attack soon
Yes, I got my V* tools mixed up
Three good reads to start:

1. Primer on ultra processed foods:
https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/what-are-ultra-processed...

2. NOVA “the food classification that categorises foods according to the extent and purpose of food processing, rather than in terms of nutrients” [PDF]:
http://archive.wphna.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/WN-2016-...

3. ‘Ultra-processed foods and added sugars in the US diet: evidence from a nationally representative cross-sectional study’:
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/6/3/e009892
Like these? https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/in...

1Password (and iCloud Keychain, maybe?) can read these off of the input element and use them when they calculate the password.
Papis: Powerful and extensible command-line based reference manager
This is probably not a popular opinion, but less environmental impact is actually more desirable to me than "no violence against animals". As far as I understand it, these sort of "animal protection" slogans only serve to make human beings feel better about ourselves, and as such could easily make us forgive (and forget) the massive amount of resources we consumed if not depleted on this earth. Simply by supplying for this huge amount of population, we have taketh away the right of other animal's possibility to have a thriving population. The human race thrived on a bloody ground, and we need to recognize that.
Because you only notice the bad ones.

It’s like CGI graphics in movies. If it looks good then it just looks good and you definitely notice when it looks bad. Your average TV show probably has half the stuff on the screen being CG in some way but millions of watchers never know.
That really depends on what you mean by 'destiny.'

If you go to community college, work hard, and get decent grades you are more-or-less guaranteed a transfer spot at a good state school.

It's actually pretty easy to transfer from a California community college right into UCSD, UCLA, UCR, etc., and these are all excellent, affordable schools. Nowhere in that process do you have to take the SAT or the ACT. You just take college classes, and get college grades that show how you perform in college. You prove yourself by actually doing the thing the standardized test is supposed to evaluate.

I would propose that we look at tests not as the solution, but as another layer of bullshit hoops people have to jump through. Just get people bootstrapped into the damn thing at low-cost, and see how they perform. Evaluate them based on that. Being an SAT savant doesn't mean someone will actually be able to do anything meaningful in the real world.

Sure, that path may not guarantee you a spot at MIT, but if you come from a variety of backgrounds and have some humility about the whole thing you're going to be just fine and you will have more than enough control to steer your destiny in whatever direction your interests lead you.

Anecdotal, but all of my friends who make over $100k went to state schools for undergrad and grad school, and not going to Yale didn't seem to pose too much of an obstacle to them leading happy, productive, and fulfilling lives.
we must also remember that these beasts are a product of selective evolution

if we had not interfered with this animal, it would have stayed similar to a gazelle

humans of course favoured a meat to size ratio and strength over agility, for their food and labour, reducing the creature to the cows we have today
The thing is, Google's customers generally do not simply want attention, they want people to pay them for something.

Thus, there is a monetary cost if the advertiser succeeds. Google is just a middleman, taking a cut of those prospective sales.

The sad part of online ads is that the internet allows an advertiser, with Google's help, to potentially annoy hundreds of millions of people in order to make some small number of sales. The "solution" to this inefficiency is "targeting" and "stickiness", and that is where the whole business becomes far too intrusive and counterproductive.

In the earlier days of the internet people knew ads were not what they wanted to see on the network. I remember the first ad someone posted to Usenet. IIRC it was an immigration lawyer. Brin and Page originally said when they announced Google in 1998 that they wanted to offer an alternative to a black box web search engine that is funded by advertising.

The only thing that has changed since then is that new users are less critical, they have no idea what the internet is like without the advertising. Imagine if every household had to participate in an AC Nielson study just to watch TV. There are generations of users now that have no idea what those times were like, when people expected privacy and there were boundaries. They cannot fully appreciate what has been lost because they never experienced it to begin with. It is not too late to reclaim what is being stolen.
Or, annoyingly, websockets.
Before reading that link, I wouldn't have believed that a USA citizen might have to get permission from the county to cut a tree on her land.