skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree with your post thread. A lot of people uninitiated in railways think of HSR as an airplanes on rails. HSR =/= Airline.

Trains have a number of advantages, one of which is a small time penalty for stopping at a station relative to aircraft (2-3 minutes vs ~45+ minutes on average), and the aircraft requires a lot personnel/all-hands to turn around quickly (see: Southwest Airlines). A commercial aircraft is simply not designed for lots of really short hops in rapid succession. There needs to be a new preflight check, refueling, unload/load belly cargo, some maintenance items are based on aircraft takeoff/landing cycles (tires, cabin pressurization, etc.) Trains stopping at station and continuing is trivial by comparison.

A rail operator wants to collect fare paying passengers along the route they are planning on operating, it’s an easy way to boost ridership and revenue. It is a balancing act to have station stops, but not increase end-to-end trip time excessively. Basic rule of thumb: Does stopping add more riders than it costs due to the stopping time penalty? If the model/data say yes, make the stop; otherwise do not.

And just because we have a station, doesn’t mean every train has stop there. We can have local, limited, and express trains. We can passing/siding tracks at stations to prevent local stopped trains from blocking the mainline for limited/express trains. We can have cross-platform time transfers between different train types and destinations. We can have multiple mainline tracks. These things do cost a bit more upfront, but it’s more about good planning and what kind of service to the public is the goal.

—
The Tokaido corridor (Tokyo-Nagoya-Osaka) is extremely dense, both the Tokaido Mainline and Shinkansen line are effectively at capacity (which is also part of impetus for the Chuo Shinkansen). Running at very high speeds with fews stops, consumes a lot track capacity. Which is why JRs prefer running more local and limited-stop service trains, and less than “non-stop” express trains. It’s what a capacity constrained operator should do to optimize operations and maximize capacity subject to those constraints.

Likewise a California HSR program, should find a way to cost effectively serve cities like Fresno, Bakersfield, Merced, etc. as part of a larger HSR network.
People are using lightning right now. Your ignorance of it isn't proof of absence.
Not caring about privacy because you have nothing to hide is like not caring about free speech because you have nothing to say.
Still, the outcome may be about the same. The incentives I described are still there and staring them in the face.
The point is that context usually suffices to tell which word is which, same as with wait/weight, time/thyme, and so on. Speakers with the pin-pen merger do pronounce these words the same, and I've known someone who was surprised to learn that I didn't—more than a year into our friendship. Yet he'd heard me talk about our friend Jen and gin, possibly even in the same sentence. He just hadn't noticed that I said them differently.

That's just the way with mergers, though: we don't attend to differences that are unimportant in our personal grammars except through conscious striving. I'm the same way with marry/merry/Mary: I know there are people who say these differently, but even if I'm talking to someone who does, those words are all the same to me. The other speaker may be giving me one of three distinct tokens by their interpretation, but whichever one it is I interpret it as one of a set of identical triplets and rely on context to tell which meaning was meant.

Or to give another example: many speakers where I grew up (Pittsburgh) reduce the diphthongs in "tire" and "tower" so that both of these words sound like "tar." In other words, three words share the same token. But I've never misinterpreted a strong-accented Yinzer's "tar" as "tire," "tower" as "tar," etc. That doesn't mean a Texan would be wrong to say that some of us pronounce these words all the same: we do.
For the most part, the cities in France that could fairly be said to have been 'flattened' during WWII were in Normandy. Paris was scarcely touched. Yet they have a high-speed rail network covering the whole country. Spain was untouched by WWII, yet they have a high-speed rail network. The U.S. somehow managed to build an interstate highway system through every major city in the decades after WWII without being bombed flat. The WWII argument seems weak.
What other FOSS like Keycloak we have available in 2021? Looking to update my knowledge on options
More info about this in the blogpost Docker without Docker[0]

[0] https://fly.io/blog/docker-without-docker/
Yes it can.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39508/how-the-aegis-co...
My solution is to just nuke them every time I get a new comp. I never really miss my old setup that much.
>If the US were to be serious about corporate IT security

What happened to the responsibility of corporations for corporate security? Including corporations that are the victims of attacks, and corporations that sell buggy operating systems and applications?

Why does the government have to provide the red teams? The general attitude is all government agencies are wasteful and incompetent, except in this circumstance where the wealthiest corporations in the history of the world apparently can't spend enough to fix their own crap. But the government not only can but should??

This just sounds like externalizing costs to the public while banking record private profits.

How about rather than subsidizing software corporations we talk about liability laws and fines, like any other physical industry that releases dangerous, broken products. Or an insurance system that is funded by a portion of the profits the software industry makes. Then we're actually making the software vendors feel some pain which will incentivize them to release higher quality code.
There's a really big difference between what public figures say and what they believe.

When you have the power to influence policy/markets/opportunities simply by saying the right or wrong thing, that starts to factor into public statements a lot more than what you actually believe.
I would like to see it preserved too, but it seems there are some tradeoffs with respect to survivability of intelligent life in the face of potential extinction events.

This is assuming that worst case scenarios are possible on Earth as on any planet… I think that’s a reasonable assumption.
If you’re the CEO, would you rather have a frustrating but profitable product or a non-frustrating but non-profitable product?

I think people forget this part of the math.
If you had eidetic memory, you would know exactly what you had wrote in said margin.
You seem unaware of proof-of-stake and other initiatives that should significantly reduce Bitcoin's footprint.
Yeah, kind of like "how I got my food for free" and the punchline is you went to a local food bank.

If you're really that interested it getting it done for the sake of curiosity the you can pay a variety of services about $200 for it.
I think the question isn't particularly relevant because many programmers are just using bcrypt in a simple way that's very well documented. I think it's reasonable to expect people to know that "auth is dangerous, don't just do your own special thing and assume it'll be fine." If you want to do something that diverges from the simple case, then please don't try to roll your own auth.
We now have speed cameras and semi automatic citations.
Yes. So is underfunding.
I think what you want to say is that he doesn't have a crystal ball instead of him not being that bright. How can anyone predict any of the above before hand? Bitcoin remains probably one of the few perplexing behaviors from Musk.
Then why did you respond to begin with? I was hoping to get something of value out of your non-answer.
Mary, merry, marry is also interesting. There's every pairwise variant, all 3, and no merger going on in various parts of the US, iirc.
You have a good counterpoint. But I think the point is fair when looking at more established companies. Even at places with formal reviews, many companies don't have a real process for career growth.
I know what you're getting at... but as far as I see it, all it means is that every company i've contracted to lately installs horrifically limiting corporate safety-dreck that ruins your battery and performance, it's really becoming a lot less fun working with computers nowadays. Everything is so slow and limited.
Just spit balling here but they have had several other pipeline shutdowns in recent years. One was blamed on a third party damaging the pipeline but I believe the others were operational issues. Perhaps there's more information on those issues than the company would like the public to know? Just a wild guess.
Oh, you’re right; I’m just clarifying. The perils of trying to fit your whole project into a tiny lead paragraph. :)
Unless you are quite rich and powerful, saying that what Assange has done is mostly "asshattery" is dishonest

Why do you think it wouldn't be dishonest if I were quite "rich and powerful"?
Your metaphor works both ways: the ability to fit billions of records in a shoebox means that it’s perfectly manageable to keep another shoebox as a backup, under independent control.
The market is partially broken because of him. He engaged in deliberate market manipulation to draw short seller blood.

Once it became clear he'd get nothing more than a slap on the wrist for that stunt they backed off and the hype machine had no counterbalance.

Once the shorts do come back though they will come back with a vengeance.
> At a $5M payout there are essentially 0 commercial IT systems in the world that can stop such an attack.

Even if that's true, it doesn't affect backups.

Back your fucking systems up properly, and if you are attacked by ransomware, then do a scorched earth restore.
I don't get it either. But nobody ever seems to stress the USDT pairs?

I'm amazed nobody's trying to cash out of tether with the pair on Coinbase. Easier to move bitcoins from the tether exchanges to Coinbase and cash out there, I guess.
I could see a competent person suggesting it for use as a honeypot for attracting malware, but not for use as a browser.
GDPR SARs are just a standardized form for a data subject to have access to data on herself.

It is, in my opinion, far politer to use a form letter Subject Access Request that can be dealt with using a standard process rather than a custom interaction.

I see it as just picking things off a menu. Far less trouble than describing to your waitress that you’re looking for a ground beef patty, grilled with cheese, with onions, tomatoes, and lettuce added and placed between two buns.

Just say cheeseburger. You know cheeseburger. They know cheeseburger. Everyone is better off.
I'm not quite sure if fly is production ready for our usecase yet, but it does look awesome though.
This is really no different from any other "engineering visionary" executive, everywhere.

These types have a solid understanding of what's technically possible by the laws of physics, but wholly underestimate the feasibility of a complete implementation.

It's an open discussion whether these types are "bad" or "good". I tend to believe that hyper-optimists have a role in this world that drives progress forward. Teddy's Roosevelt's "Man in the arena", if you will.
Mars has about a third of the Earth's, so it's not microgravity and is about twice as powerful as the Moon's. There are not many reasons to expect it will create huge health issues for earthlings but if you spend too much time on Mars without exercising on a centrifuge, adapting back to Earth could be a problem. There will be some loss of muscular mass, at least.
If the mugger isn't bluffing, then he'll get your money one way or the other. This makes it different from paying ransoms.

Furthermore, a corporation's bottom line is not truly comparable to a human life. However it is my understanding that paying ransoms to save human lives is technically illegal to. If paying a ransom to save your family member's life is illegal, then corporations paying ransoms to protect their finances should certainly be illegal.
Quite. What I would like to hear from all these gung-ho types, is how we go about producing quantities of a simple 2-core power cable, on Mars, or in the asteroids or the Moon.

But no doubt they will say: use broadcast power.
Force the company to issue more shares and give them to the government.
> He's thought that full self driving was 6 months away for literally 4 years now.

He might be completely aware that it's not plausible while still publicly saying otherwise for financial gain.
I couldn't really like, or care for, the characters.
Makes me wonder if they actually implemented their own kerning..
In 2017/18 the "smart" money was early into ICOs and the "fools" are just getting into those over the past year. Meanwhile the "smart" money has moved on to DeFi and all that nonsense - DeX, yield farming (ponzi scheming), flash loans, etc. The next cycle you'll see smart money move onto something else, and they'll have figured out how to repackage DeFi to the average fool, which will come with greater linkages to the inherent financial systems.

What made the GFC such a massive bubble was how much the financial system was woven into Mortgages/CDOs. Crypto is not there yet, right now it could pop and you'd hear a few regretful stories and friends who lost a few hundred on the "Doge", but it wouldn't be a widespread disaster. Once you start seeing apps utilizing DeFi to enable average "fools" to purchase equities, fund home/auto/college loans etc that will signal a bubble with vicious potential.

Dogecoin purchases via Robinhood is probably the easiest we have right now to getting the average fool to trade their currency for memes, but that's still a small subset of gambling.
> mostly what Assange has done s good

No, colluding with the GRU to create false documents interfering with the US Presidential election, resulting in the disaster that was Trump's election can not, in any sense, be called 'good'.
I personally feel that Musk's strategy is that any publicity for his companies is good publicity, so he puts himself out there trying to connect popular themes like cryptocurrency to them in any way possible. Other practitioners of this strategy that come to mind are Richard Branson in business and Donald Trump in politics. Their number one priority above all is to dominate the news cycle, which equates to free marketing.

Given the above, I highly doubt that this (or the original adoption of Bitcoin earlier this year) is due to any deep feelings he may have about the merits or otherwise of Bitcoin itself. I also predict that he'll soon reverse himself publicly all over again.
Don't get me started on the people who listed among their complaints about The Last Jedi that "Rey's parents are nobodies and that's lame and I don't like it".

Setting aside whether or not that being true would be a good move for the franchise: the film didn't say that's true. It had one character say it to another. In a franchise that has a history of having one character lie to another about exactly this kind of thing. In an entry in that franchise that is explicitly playing with point-of-view and subjective experience of events.

But no, that must just be true I guess.
Why would he try it again? At this point what bet would require all of his assets like before?
Venus is very easy to preserve.
It's unlikely their code is hosted on GitHub because the hackers wouldn't want to leave such an obvious trace there.

I think you're right that unless there is evidence code is hosted there, the judge wouldn't authorize a "fishing" exercise to search random sources for the code. In a hypothetical, what would this even give? The IP addresses of the authors? They are likely running through a proxy anyways so it wouldn't help. The private key? It might have been generated server-side or using an algorithm outside the code so might not help.

What I'm saying is getting the code source might not even be helpful depending on how it was implemented and if only the client code can be found.
He has
1) Shown us what his word is worth to the speculative market club
2) Brought about two news cycles in which Americans will be taught about cryptocurrency
3) Made the right long-term move for the environment. If crypto is indeed the currency of the future then there's absolutely no reason for us to all pile on to any version of it that requires us to pollute.

Sound familiar?

Welcome to the wide world of symbolic lessons. If this blows your mind, wait 'til you take a long look at Republicans.
>the state is actually incapable of pulling every single speeder over and ticketing them.

a) technology exists where you can just record license plates and send speeding tickets automatically - which is a nice prallel for mass surveilance tech - it makes large scale enforcement much cheaper

b) you don't really need to enforce on everyone, a high deterrant + random enforcement creates strong incentives against doing something (ie. making examples)
I'm not going to disagree with the arguments you are making as they are valid in their own right, but I will point some to some important tradeoffs your post skips over.

First, there is a fundamental tradeoff between location and transportation. Land is not a produced good, it is owned by landlords and its value comes from location.

Transportation makes prime land less valuable and outlying land more valuable, thus it redistributes value outward, allowing people to escape from the thumbs of landlords and buy their own land. Eisenhower's freeway building project and cheap gas is responsible for the American middle class, much moreso than anything FDR did, as people could move out of apartment buildings in inner cities and buy land of their own, due to the improvements in transportation technology.

For those improvements to work, you have to fan out. A rail line isn't going to get it done, but what a rail line can do is transport people to a remote place and then they fan out with roads. That is a good idea for redistributing people if an area is already densely populated and the land is bought in a large circle around the city. Then you hop on a train to take you to nowhere and there you can buy cheap land. But if the built up area is relatively small, you are better off with a network of cheap roads to carry you to where land is cheaper.

Thus the U.S., which has always had smaller cities surrounded by more open space than Europe, got more bang from its buck with roads. But the same network of roads did not have the transformative effect in Europe as it did in the U.S.

What is interesting is the shift to remote work. The internet has made communication another strong rival to location, providing another threat to land values in inner cities. So it could be that in the future, we will not need so many subsidies for transportation but for things like broadband, to help nurture the middle class and allow people to buy land in remote areas.

People - especially landlords -- are very much aware of these dynamics, which is why historically there was great opposition to roads from moneyed interests, as documented by Adam Smith. And why roads are deserving of subsidies, due to all the positive externalities. In the same way, internet infrastructure is deserving of subsidies today. Whether or not rail is deserving of subsidies in the US depends on how large the disk is of expensive land surrounding cities. In the northeast, it is large, and that's why you see rail in the northeast. In most of the U.S., it's not large at all and you can buy affordable land without traveling too far away from work. In Europe, it tends to be large as well.

With the internet, that is only getting better and both road and rail are becoming less relevant as an agent for the promotion of the middle class land ownership. They are still relevant, but I believe the window has closed on dreams of high speed rail connecting cities in the U.S. High speed internet will get the job done faster and easier, if coupled from a large shift to working from home.
Incredibly realistic....for a film.

An actual incredibly realistic film would be very very boring. Now let's follow Bob as he runs vibration testing on a small sensor in the rocket for the 12th time.

And now the crew spend 12 years travelling through space with nothing happening.

Maybe we can show some people debugging the AI code for the robot
Many worlds (by which I mean the Everett interpretation, not sure which you mean) is 100% deterministic.

The impact that apparent world branching has to domain of the free will question is purely due to the "amplification effects" that a complex control system like our brain can have in reaction to something perceived as a "measurement" result.

We cannot sense a superposition state directly. The moment we probe a particle, our instruments and us (the environment) becomes entangled with the observed particle. The instrument and later we the observers of the instrument are ourselves a quantum system with a well defined quantum stats, and a third observer not yet entangled with us can treat as still in a superposition state.

The idea is that everything evolves according to the Schrodinger equation. The wave function never really collapses. The illusion of wave function collapse springs out of the way that a control system like a brain or a mechanical automaton processes it's inputs while being in an entangled state with the thing they observe and thus react to it's state differently in the different superimposed states. This difference becomes amplified. A control system like a brain is not necessary; just pure macroscopic environments are enough to diverge the apparent state of the systems so that it's useful to think in terms of "world splitting"; but it's just a useful fiction; very useful because that's all we'll ever witness.

The amplification effect of control systems makes it easy to concoct extreme thought experiments. Let's imagine that spin up means you fire off a rocket and go to Mars and spin down means you stay put. All we did is that we managed to amplify the effect of this single superimposed state of one particle, into a macroscopic superposition of a rocket being on earth or on mars
You can easily tell whether someone is smiling or not underneath a mask, and I think most people have learned to "smile with their eyes" to make it even more obvious. It's not that big a deal.
The trouble with shorting tether is how to collect when the platform is part of your risk/threat model.

This is already the case for shorting crypto - the exchanges have always front-run the customers. And notice how when the price goes down, all the exchanges go down for sudden unscheduled maintenance, like they did just this week.
Yeah, that's a bizarre headline. I'm not sure it's wrong, but it's quite strange.

Edit: I'm not sure actually right either. It was not the act of eating that transported the bodies; rather the bodies were brought there so they could be eaten.

"Hyenas dragged 9 Neanderthals to a cave to eat them."
MasterCard and Visa take tiny amounts, too.

DOGE and PRV (WSBCoin anyone?) don't require these layers.
It's not four, the fact that the others applications are reliably detected as not present are additional bits.
It depends entirely on your stack + use case! If you feel like emailing I can give you an honest take. :)
Having your name be immortalized forever in history is something that appeals to a lot of people, especially billionaires who have run out of things to buy.
My understanding is that they didn't have an option. IE has so many idiosyncrasies that they couldn't make it compatible with modern Web standards and simultaneously retain compatibility with sites that were built for IE.

Better to write a new browser so that enterprise clients can use both - one for their legacy apps and the other for new stuff and the modern web - while they get everything migrated over one at a time. Versus, changing IE in place would have forced clients to rewrite everything overnight, which would have been a much, much worse situation.