skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You seem to be dealing with a very specific situation that relates to you.

"Hands-on" skills are not the only valuable skill (however you define them), and being able to communicate effectively is sometimes more important. With today's prerogative of building "things" (whether that's a product or a research paper) as a team, communication skills easily slide to the top.

What you may perceive as "charisma" is probably a better communication skill: it can be learned as well.

Now notably, academic circles are generally festered with politics, and it takes a really strong will to let your skill do the talking. But in commercial settings, good managers are aware that you can get away with a few bad communicators if they are extraordinarily skilled, as long as you channel their energy properly.

In general, you can rarely control what others do, so the best starting point is to control what you do: try to train yourself to manage your emotions, to be more diplomatic in how you critique others (perhaps check out Radical Candor?), and how to gain the skill to let your skills shine through without getting pulled down to the "gossip" level.

Sometimes easier said than done, when the best way out is, well... out.
Multiple yubikeys has been the best option I've found. You can scan the TOTP QR codes into more than one key when you set up 2fa. (Ones with proper key support are even easier to do).

The reason I prefer it is that I don't want to store 2fa credentials on the cloud and I don't want to lose all my codes if I brick my phone. SMS is a poor 2nd factor, so I'd prefer not to rely on it.

There are other issues, no situation is perfect, but I have found hardware keys to be much simpler in the long run.
> Same failure mode where it just refused to boot no matter what I did

Maybe because of no internet?
Have you not seen companies with white guys in leadership promoting whoever they seem to have the best rapport with and that just happens to be mostly white guys like themselves? No racism of any kind is needed for a companies leadership to become homogeneous.
> I have a (perhaps unpopular) pet theory that college as we know it going to cease to exist sometime in the next several decades.

This has been an on going prediction since, and likely before, television became a thing.

Universities are worthwhile because you're surrounded by other driven students. The social aspect is at least as important as the quality of educational instruction, and remote learning isn't going to replace that any time soon. It isn't even a good replacement for in-person instruction, but at least it's starting to become a workable alternative.

> future generations will look less favorably at taking on a huge debt burden to attend in-person college

I agree here, but it will likely mean that student pick less expensive universities or some other in-person alternative (e.g., in the states, community college for two years -> two years at a state university).
You have been there, and you're still around. I would call it "surviving." There are people who fare much worse.
Thanks for the in-depth response, much appreciated! Turns out Lord Howe Island was actually on my partner's bucket list. I definitely bumped it up a bit more now.
https://www.independentsciencenews.org/commentaries/an-inter... is also an interesting and relevant interview.
Can't we just have giant "salt plains" where we allow the brine to evaporate and we just collect the remaining salt/minerals?

Maybe I'm crazy or not informed enough, but I always thought this water-desalination thing was a solved problem. Then I got confused when they talked about how there is "brine waste" and it's a huge ecological problem. Why do they stop short of full evaporation of the brine?
The article seems to suggest this is a bad thing, but my first reaction is "fantastic". Pharmaceutical companies create life saving medicines and then use advanced social media targeting to locate the people that need them.

The only bad thing about it is if those people targeted can't afford the medication, which is why healthcare needs to be a universal right.

People love to bitch about Big Pharma but I have a magical little blue tool that completely relieves my asthma, and I can buy them with absolutely no trouble at the pharmacy for about $6. My brother got diagnosed with MS recently. My aunt got diagnosed with MS 40 years ago. Thanks to the research that happened in the last 40 years, my brother's experience with MS is worlds apart (mostly because we live in Australia and he has free access to tens of thousands of dollars of treatment).

Pharmaceutical companies are responsible for developing vaccines for a global pandemic at light speed. They're great! Let's celebrate Big Pharma!

But let's also make sure that the gains from these amazing advances in technology are shared equitably.

And maybe, just maybe, if the medical companies find they need to use Facebook to shift their product, we should be looking at a more formal and closely regulated method of distribution that isn't so commercially driven.

I mean, the private sector is great at commercialisation, but is it really the be all and end all when it comes to such a crucial social function as healthcare?
None of those are systemic causes. Those are all cases of individual prejudice or racism adding up to make a statistical significance. Calling this systemic racism is a good way of how to never solve the actual problem.
> There is no guess work. You have a block or concrete foundation, no water leaks in the house, and that's basically it.

You also need proper ventilation/drainage to ensure that you don't get moisture build-up inside walls and other spaces from condensation and the like, but admittedly that's more of a factor for things like dry rot or mold, rather than termites.
yep. That's a reasonable view. Hence:

>> they may not want to talk of course.

C++ as an indicator of dud project, poor team and programmer lack of taste is valid. It isn't necessarily always true but there's no reason for you to care if you've gone that way and it worked.
Grand Theft Auto (in CSS)
You are giving your behavior data for free. It's a win for the receiver, because they don't usually provide the aggregated data back. Sure, you're also getting a product for "free", but this kind of transaction (data for product) is not required in free software. The philosophy is completely different. And let's face it, the data they collect have intrinsic value in aggregate. I'm not saying they're going to use it for nefarious purposes, but it'll enrich them in a way I'm not sure is completely ethical by my standards (hoarding behavior data, surveillance). Phrased in yet another way, you're giving them an edge to transform into personal data business. This may be unanticipated, but so long as the collected data will be their private property, it's real possibility.
That’s not gloating.
The words to content ratio is high here.

Finally, after about 100 meters of semi-infinite scrolling, he says something important.

"Why Does DARPA Work? " covers DARPA program managers extensively, but the key points are worth reiterating both as a refresher and to emphasize that empowered PMs are the core thing one should not mess with. "What about managing programs through a committee?" NO. "What if performers just submitted grants and coordinated among themselves?" NO. "What about a more rigorous approval process to make sure money isn't wasted?" NO. "What if people could be career program managers?" NO. You get the point."

The point being that DARPA program managers are people who've done something good but are not primarily managers. Their role is somewhat like VCs, without the greed. The problems DARPA works on tend to be rather specific. Many reflect specific military goals. Here's the current project list.[1] Examples: Automated air combat. A transportable linear accelerator. "Persistent, wide-area surveillance of all UAS operating below 1,000 feet in a large city." "Gun-hard, high-bandwidth, high-dynamic-range, GPS-free navigation." Note how different this is from a list of start up companies. These are technical goals, not business goals. Most are hard engineering problems, not pure science. They reflect specific military problems.

The author's article doesn't reflect that tight focus.

DARPA has a customer - the US Department of Defense. The purpose of DARPA is to solve hard problems for DoD, sometimes if DoD doesn't know it has them yet, and sometimes because DoD has a big problem and needs it dealt with. A "private ARPA" as proposed by the author has no customer. That defocuses the organization. It's not clear what a "private ARPA" is for. Even after reading all that verbiage.

Then there's the problem, who does the work? DARPA funding generally goes to small parts of companies that do major work for DoD, or who have expertise making some specific thing. Not post-doc researchers. Not startups. DARPA does not create organizations to work for them. They use little pieces of existing organizations.

The paper looks almost entirely at US institutions. This needs more reach. China has been opening lots of research organizations. Some are boondoggles, some produce good results. Take a hard look at that. Look at what Korea is doing. Figure out why Japan's R&D stagnated.

There are two good books about DARPA - "The Pentagon's Brain", and "The Imagineers of War". I've read the first, but not the second. The first gives a good sense of how the organization works.

(It's been a long time, but I've worked on a DARPA program.)

[1] https://www.darpa.mil/our-research
I use temp containers on firefox, set it up to automatically open a temp container for medium based articles.

But yeah, fucke medium
Why don't we mandate Huxley's Soma for everyone so all anger is suppressed at all times? Really, this obsessive hunting for displays of anger and ruining people's lives over it and the Schadenfreude makes me wonder who the actual psychopaths are.
Apple, Google, and Microsoft all support FIDO in their OSes and browsers.
It would be an interesting CS problem to properly type the return values of random bash commands.
Sars reemerged twice between 2003 and 2006, once in 2004 from civets and once in 2005 from an accidental lab release. Another potential outbreak in 2005 was prevented by preemptively culling civets when a high titre of SARS coronavirus was discovered. And civets eventually lead to the actual source on bats.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB107456233748805972
Some relevant discussion in the piece:

> “Once a pirated movie was found, Mr. Vasallo and Plaintiff would send YouTube a takedown notice. YouTube would then remove the pirated video movie in its entirety. However, YouTube would not remove all matching videos, as YouTube would specifically only remove the one video from the one infringer related to the single infringing upload identified in the takedown notice.

> “The same infringer would be free to upload the video again until three takedown notices were filed against him within a ninety-day period. Then and only then, would YouTube cancel the infringer’s username. The same infringer could then create a new username and begin the process of posting the pirated videos all over again,” the complaint notes.

> Over the past several years, the law firm sent over 10,000 takedown notices for pirated films that were viewed more than 500 million times on YouTube. The video service maintains that this is how the DMCA works, but the movie tycoon argued that the company should do more.

This (that is, uselessly) is also how YouTube used to handle domestic copyright claims. It is the process the law specifies. But they moved to their ContentID system despite not having to. Why?

Whatever reasons applied there may also apply here.
Can you provide some counter-examples, probably as issues in the repo?
That's viewing things from the author's point of view, while I was suggesting the publisher's motive for wanting an article with this sort of theme. Ultimately the publisher is maximizing readership, and thus revenue.
What don't you like about the Win10 + Edge implementation?
perhaps you’re just privileged to have only worked with great people!

one alternative might be that you’re a little toxic?

who knows. doesn’t make everyone else’s lived experiences invalid :)
Definitely this is very common. I've seen static variables with Arc+Mutex and initialised with lazy_static when they're only used once in a single thread, in multiple jobs.
The big complexity in software is where it interfaces to business problems and interacting with humans.

Where there is a defined task such as language interpretation or codec conversion (ffmpeg), there a virtuoso programmer or small team can really produce some amazing work.
No, people who are elected to make laws are called lawmakers. No one elected the citizens of California who are voting on the propositions.
"All it takes is for good men to do nothing". It seems Burke never said that, nor "evil will therefore good must".

Nevertheless, I have never experienced a "toxic mob" situation but rather a few bullies with a complicit crowd, often afraid to be turned victims. I find the realization of this complicity weakness to hurt even more than the actual bully abuse.
I assume some of the difficulty comes from irreproducible builds. There’s been a lot of progress on that in the past few years.
As pointed out above, gcc ≥11 optimises it to a switch / lookup table (https://godbolt.org/z/PxvGKqGrd).
This is nothing new. These sentiments have always been common.

Clips from a well-known 1960s documentary with context from one of the filmers (Sixteen at Webster Groves): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giQxUkZ4Anc
If you really want to be utilitarian about it, then you must weigh the lives saved by donations against the lives destroyed by advertisements. If Jeff does not comes out ahead, he is terrible. The Less Wrong creed "shut up and multiply" is relevant, I ask commenters be sure to understand what I mean before replying to my argument.

I estimate that while he is still earning income, the upper bound for person-years saved will be 550_000 (30 more working years, 19_000_000$ total donations, a lifetime is worth 100 years and costs 3_500$). I estimate the lower bound for person-years destroyed will be 24_000 person-years (50_000_000 people affected, each losing 365 seconds every year over 42 years). These numbers are inconclusive.

I cannot answer the big philosophical question whether he shares responsibility with the other people working in advertisements, so we would divide the total destruction person-years by the number of people working in advertisements. If yes, this would certainly make the donation scheme very favourable/positively utilitarian.
I use Wasabi with Clouberry for backups and otherwise store all data on my hard disks.

But if you're into "cloud" storage, Mega.nz gives you 50GB of free and very reliable storage.
I recently couldn't log in to my Google account on a new device (with a strong password) and the best I got from Google was an email how my login was blocked for security reasons without any indications on how I can say "hey, it was me".

Thank you Google, but I'd rather keep my password than you worry about my logins. You don't know how valuable this account is to me, and what kind of protections I want for it (it's an account I use solely to set up play store on my otherwise de-googled phones).
Or, I go to a doctor, who is a medically trained professional, and they prescribe a medicine to me based on their experience and training, without any incentive for financial reward?
TL;DR: wealth helps a lot, but not in the "parents paid the diploma" direct way. More because good social status helps putting people in the right track. Hard work is still required IMHO (at least for the engineering track, I do not know about the business schools variant).

Wealth definitely helps in the sense it gives you a better environment to support you during your studies. About it helping you being tutored by fancy private organisms, this is true but I think it applies more to the "lower" part of the Grandes Écoles & co pyramid. You are not going to enter Polytechnique or ENS solely because of that. It still requires a lot of work or talent.

About the set of high schools/classes préparatoires funneling a large part of candidates to top schools, that is definitely true. But again it requires a lot of work, you are not going to move through Henri IV or whatever to ENS only because your parents have money. But receiving a good education from birth and having family and friends who knows how the system work, because they moved through it themselves, helps a lot.

But wealth helps because these places are usually in large cities (and mostly in Paris), which are expensive to live in. And to get there you have to come from good/prestigious high schools and have good grades, which again living in a wealthy family helps a lot.
The issue with actix-we wasn't about people badgering the author to remove unsafe and they got tired of it/burned out and tried to find people to take over? I remember that the unsafe code wasn't really necessary with regards to the performance benefit.
You appear to be assuming the advertisement medically benefits a patient.

I don't believe there's any evidence for this and ads for prescription drugs are banned almost globally for good reason. "Ask your doctor about" may bias the doctor away from a different drug that is more appropriate but has a lower profit margin, for example.
What are these costs?
Performance costs? Most of C++ abstraction are zero costs. There is always the possibility of misusing them, but you can also misuse C libraries.
Learning costs? This is compensated by the fact that you don't have to re learn each project convention in C to emulate the same feature.
Compile time costs? Yeah, that can be annoying.
Costs of more bugs? In my experience, the better type system makes it unlikely.
Some of these authenticator apps store their state in your phones TPM (or "secure enclave") already.

All you're really saying is you want them to ship the authenticator apps to desktop platforms as well as mobile..
This shows that 8 is possible :)

Ɣঔໃݹஐټຯپ௧এІK௨ಗາɢƏࡈາɕƔןІJ௧ڠຽঅসඞݕݹமΒІυݸටຯວ௨ටȣƫ௨ඖІܥ௨ౚഫݹđҨSঅரեໃƫ௨൝ධݛࠑಧషҪࡐԊໂƷஓҸգǶߜඖڪڤ௨డลГଚ౾κʥࢳॴ༱uझٯฦܥƑȺیюಳϾຯஞ௧ڈ๓ଖಱலะCஐشڛઝѻਯϝລ
That's good to know, because I find that abusive, and disrespectful to people who are just trying to discuss things. But people on the "believer" side are no better. I'm sorry to seem to falsely accuse you of that, I really wasn't. I'm just sort of waxing in all directions to share my views, taking as a starting point the inspiration from people's comments here. It needed to be said, anyway :P ;) xx

I agree with you that it's a leap of faith. I'm not asking you to make that leap. Seems you have an open mind. All I'm saying is all these experiencer testimonies I think means something is happening.

I'm not sure if by picked up you mean "detected in their telescopes" or "the story picked up and discussed". Case 1 is I think unlikely unless there were sightings everywhere at once. But there have been multiple things seen in the sky over a number of places, like Mexico City, Phoenix, Belgium, etc, that got lots of press, and have videos and hundreds of witnesses. Case 2 I think is a result of stigma. For the same reason that, even tho > 50% of people believe in aliens and psychic abilities, you are not allowed to research into those things, and if you do, people will call you crazy. It's changing a bit now...but

I agree with you on the vastness making it difficult. But I think it's arrogant to say, "Well, it looks difficult. Nah, can't be done." because that assumes that other civilizations would be unlikely to achieve more than us. I think the vastness of space and time, and our civilization's minuteness, is its own counter example to that take. It permits an alternate take which suggests there has to be somebody else out there, and they had plenty of time to do stuff.

In terms of why there's no "open contact" I like to fall back on the Star Trek Prime Directive.
Reservoirs are expensive. The commenter you are replying to was careful to use the phrase "economically plausible."
Seems like they only should depend on the parts of dependency that actually get incorporated in the dependent.

For instance:

- Changes to C source files of a shared library should not require a rebuild of dependents (assuming you don't LTO with shared library bitcode)

- Changes to an executable in a dependency that you run as a child process during usage but not at build time should not require a rebuild of dependents
Story how I lost $10.000.000
I really like this emphasis on trust. I have worked on “superstar” teams where people sabotaged each other at every turn. I have seen teams with a real mix of talent, sometimes pretty mediocre honestly, achieve amazing things because everyone just rows in the same direction.
Don’t give the plum Europe posts to donors and allies
Jesus Christ. As if Node wasn't bad enough.
> But then, we should probably also apply Hanlon's razor [2] "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"

Escape from an incompetently-secured and reckless lab definitely falls under "stupidity". There is nothing malicious about it.
Well unamployment benefits does not need to be constant.

Where I am from I can get 90% of my previous paycheck up to a max of approx 3200 USD a month for the first two years.

Then they start to drop off quite fast to a much lower buttom.

So even if a new job was lower than the 3200 USD I could be getting I would still be incentivised to get a new job before the high benefits runs out.
The key thing about the theory was that it was disproven when the industrial revolution took off. Incredible amounts of innovation and production in 2 centuries that did more for humanity's living standards than the previous millennium.

The key question is: what will power this sort of growth in the future? What sort of innovation will there be?

Malthus underrated the prospects of new technologies. The risk today is that we are overrating how impactful new technologies will be. This is the crux of the issue.
Presumably they specialised in coronaviruses because of the proximity to a bat population with coronaviruses, making sample gathering much easier? Are there other areas with significant coronavirus hosts? Are there other labs that specialise in coronaviruses to the same extent? The two seem linked to me, although I have no background in this area.

So we'd a priori expect coronavirus to originate in the area with coronavirus hosts, whether it was through the lab or the market...
A question: where do I find those lucrative contracts :)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187350612... Here is a paper that states that the furin cleavage site appears naturally in a number of viruses.

I looked into these lab origin theories for the furin cleavage site last year. The problem with it being a laboratory insertion was that although performing an insertion is relatively easy once you know what to insert, generally it’s beyond current science to independently create mutations for a specific purpose.

It’s a bit beyond me as a non-biologist but my feeling based on the literature was that the lab origin was unlikely. However it is pushed in certain circles partly for ideological reasons, based on evidence that is plausible at first glance but with a lot more digging not entirely convincing evidence.

However, there didn’t really seem to be much neutral expert analysis of the evidence.