skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A common meme I've seen recently is "no one knows what they're doing".

I think people like to believe this because it helps them cope with impostor syndrome, or maybe they think it puts them on even ground with people who do in fact know what they're doing.
New Covid origination intelligence push aimed at elevating scientific analysis
"Like take the exchange with the front door that you mentioned, where the protagonist basically had a human argument with it to be let out (and with his fridge). It indeed seems humorous at first, but once you realize that the book isn't a Douglas Adams'esque comedy, it seems downright bonkers!"

To enjoy soft scifi and fantasy, you have to be able to be able to suspend disbelief.

Your complaint about the protagonist arguing with his door reminds me of people who read Tolkien and then complain that elves and balrogs don't exist. No, they don't, and you have to be able to get past that to enjoy the books.

Also, it's uncanny how many of Dick's "bonkers" ideas have wound up being close to where we are now or soon will be.

Even with something as outrageous as arguing with a door, we're pretty close to arguing with our phones. Voice recognition and voice synthesis has already allowed us to talk to our phones, and while phones aren't arguing back yet (afaik), it's not inconceivable that they will if corporate dominance proceeds apace. With the development of the Internet of Things, more and more appliances are likely to have that capability. I'm not sure about doors, but fridges are already part of the IOT. So Dick's world, even in this respect, may not be that far off.

Much harder for me to swallow are things like Ubik itself (whatever it is) and the various entities that seem to rule that world. But their improbability does not detract from my enjoyment of the book in the least, because I am able to suspend disbelief.

Also, as I said in another reply in this thread, I think PKD's books are much more comprehensible and relatable if you've had some bad trips on psychedelics. It's quite common for people in such states to experience inanimate objects as menacing and/or alive, for the world to seem inhabited by powerful spirits, to experience one's death, afterlife, and rebirth, etc..

So to someone experienced with psychedelics, reading PKD might not necessarily elicit a reaction of just "that's weird," but "I know what that's like. I've been there."
Mark my words, the day will come when we can grow our computers. Caring for your systems and networks will be a biological affair. Synthetic biology is at the stage of creating a transistor; the biological equivalent of a 8086 will be the next step, and one I have no doubt will be reached in my lifetime.
Profiling our assembler with the DMD compiler
I would suggest you avoid thinking in too general of terms like this. There are dozens of kinds of docs. It's better to think about the document's specific purpose, audience, what you need to convey, what the audience wants to know, and how they want to absorb it. Then write, then read it as that intended audience, see if that person can make sense of it, and if it provides enough information. If you can't put yourself in their shoes, have the audience proofread it.

Two important lessons I learned:

1. Formatting and direct communication is very useful. It can make the difference between someone stopping and noticing critical information, or skipping it because they're lazy readers.

2. You probably don't know the correct way to convey information, and the audience probably doesn't know how to tell you how to convey it either. You need to listen for when the docs fail: when somebody says they read the docs but still don't know something or don't do something right. That means your doc has a "bug" in how it gets through to the reader. Experiment, change things around, add/remove information, etc until the bug is gone.
It happened to me too. In fact I'm in the process of leaving the field for something else altogether. I do tend to get weird looks and "whys" when I mention it, but its difficult for me to really explain in a concrete way, but I've just lost all excitement and motivation to do anything with programming (despite my mind still operating in very much a hacker mindset, where I see X and thing "I bet I could make X do Y)
So, say you live in a rural area but have one local supermarket (5-10 mins away), and the next supermarket is 30-45 minutes away.

You keep finding the food you're buying is mouldy so you complain/return it.

They ban you.

So, now you need to spend significantly more money and time on petrol and driving in order to do you weekly shop.

That's OK?
And that's why they won their fraud dispute...

There will always be a generic and broad policy first. Then it will - and did - get resolved on further investigation.
Please explain how Dijkstra's _Go To Statement Considered Harmful_ (see https://homepages.cwi.nl/~storm/teaching/reader/Dijkstra68.p... for the text) is part of mathematics. Then Knuth's famous reply _Structured Programming with Go To_ (available at http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.103...) and then the much later follow-up at https://cis.temple.edu/~ingargio/cis71/software/roberts/docu..., _Loop Exits and Structured Programming: Reopening the Debate_.

When you've disposed of those, read the less well-known paper _Programming as Theory Building_ by Peter Naur (see https://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/Naur.pdf for a link).

Are there computer science papers that could fit within mathematics? Yes. Are there important computer science papers that clearly don't? Also yes.
One can hope, but sadly I don't think it's going to be an easy shift.

People managing work, from what I've seen, still prefer to babble over their scribbled 5 basic points than taking the time to do their job and create relevant textual information. Then you listen, you take notes, and then you go and produce whatever documentation of the objective is required to at least understand if it's going to work. Of course you still will have gaps in your understanding, so then more calls, and repeat. In the end, unnecessary/missing features, a whole bunch of time wasted in crap, deadlines missed, burnt time, all of which could have been avoided if someone just had taken the time to do their supposed job - this is not to say it wouldn't have to be discussed, or that there's no need for back and forth and calls, etc, it's just instead of starting halfway you start from -50% or something.

Even in outsourcing platforms there's been a shift contrary to that. At least two years ago and before that, video calls or calls weren't really usual unless you were in some months long collaboration - now even there everyone expects video calls on the interview... It doesn't matter if it's a $100 one time job or whatever.
I wonder if this will be good for Phabricator. The commercialisation / support model made it basically impossible to contribute code to (or at least enough of a pain that only the most determined people would bother). If a community fork emerges we might see more contributions.
Try building something of your own just for fun. See if you see sparks of your old love back.
>> All you need is a pile of cloud VMs, and industry can get you that.

That is true if by "AI research" you mean "applications", as opposed to contributing anything new. To contribute new knowledge what is needed is time and the resoruces to study the work of those who have contributed new knowledge before you, and to become an expert in that knowledge. In theory, that's half the job of a PhD student. The other half is creating new knowledge. Beating benchmarks is not the job of a researcher, despite what's the norm in machine learning research these days.

>> So I don't have an answer for why those coauthors went along with it.

Because the motivation of researchers in industry is money, not knowledge. Academia is capable of motivating researchers to create new knowledge. It is also capable of motivating them to commit academic fraud. But industry only understands one motive and can only offer one reward.

Basically, if your university pushes you to publish or perish, you might publish bullshit, or perish, or find yourself a niche where you can publish something that isn't bullshit. Many researchers do this, but of course you don't hear about them because they're not in the news. In fact, you probably hadn't heard about Geoff Hinton, Yoshua Bengio, Yan Le Cunn and You-Again Schmidhuber before the big boom of deep learning, because at the time they were just such small-fry researchers (compared to what they are today- I once had a look at Hinton's publication record and he was anything but small fry academically, even in the 1980's, when the lore says he was roaming the academic wilderness isolated from the mainstream; it's all bollocks). For sure, no Google was throwing millions at them at the time and the machine learning community as a whole had more or less given up on neural networks, or rather the majority of machine learning researchers where happy to leave Hinton et al and Schmidhuber to work on neural nets, while everyone else was working on Bayes nets, then decision trees, then SVMs, etc.

I digress, but what I'm trying to say is that "publish or perish" is the norm for researchers who are not motivated enough, for their own personal reasons, to make meaningful contributions. They are not the only kind of researcher and when progress happens, it comes from the other kind. But researchers in industry only have one motive, because industry offers only one incentive and is only interested in results that satisfy that incentive- regardless of how those results are brought about.
perhaps one argument against this is that a clear, well scoped, and evidence-supported narrative document like this seems to not have been read by a healthy third of the commenters. I'm not being glib: the painfully low information density of a PP presentation is such that by the end of it, no one can claim to have missed any of the points. If the real point of the presentation is informing subsequent discussion among the attendees (which it is at my workplace) then the best written handout in the world won't get you too far if people are "skimming".

(really, I know metadiscussion is frowned upon, but it's quite striking how many comments I'm seeing state "PP is a tool" or "the deficiency is the speaker's" without touching upon the arguments against these in the piece... there's really something interesting there)
I get the distinct impression that the Twitter sphere isn’t genuinely concerned about people of color, or else they would express concern over, say, inner city violence. Instead they work hard to brand any such concern as “far-right”.
It's a lot better for those with the highest LTV's (ie, the richest), that's for sure!
> women are basically always potential romantic partners

Ok, why would that not be the case? Laws? PC? Age difference? Love/biology doesn't care about social rules, and this has been shown time and again in every possible situation you could think of.

> you can sort of see how absurd it is

Huh, no I can't. What makes it different when you reverse the situation?
Effectively communicating through text amplified due to WFH. If you can avoid syncing up on video chat and resolve something with a couple of back and forth messages. That's a win
I'm genuinely interested to hear how this gets implemented in a way that's not grossly time-consuming.

As I understand it, the requirement is basically that every time you use BTC for a purchase, you're required to identify the USD basis for the BTC and take a gain or a loss according to the USD value of the transaction, right?

For me, it's painful enough to do that for a relative handful of stock trades throughout the course of the year, and that's with my brokerage tracking the basis and sale price of various lots for me.

I can't even begin to imagine the nausea of having to track all that myself and report it.
I assume that even though I use a vpn and have ads blocked almost completely, my browser is fingerprinted and my phone tracked so that I'm giving valuable data almost all the time anyway.
Only that the Opium Wars was just the beginning, the whole series of events lasted until the end of WWII before people can have any sort of peace, not the case for Britains burning White House
then you would only be able to sue over damages, and with a roof maybe your only damages are the time spent planning and getting the permits to get the roof done, but if TSLA hadn’t even started ripping off the roof then I don’t see what damages you could claim against them (TSLA’s legal team surely weighed the possibility of a class action lawsuit).
Some woke people will argue that they are “white adjacent” when convenient (e.g., the Harvard admissions scandal) but also that they are people of color when convenient (e.g., the Atlanta spa killings).
Did you confuse at-will employment (employer can fire for any reason) with right to work laws (companies can't have an agreement with a union that forces all employees to join or pay union dues)?
Physical geography defines practical transportation links. But political geography also limits or forbids movement. Much of Russia's reactionary violence in Georgia, Ukraine, etc. is generated by fear that a thick "European" border will sever "Russian" regions from their own Moscow-centered physical-political network.

Religious geography has a similar influence as a legacy of history and empire.

And so, the distinctions between geographic Europe, EU Europe, Nato Europe, and Catholic/Protestant Europe are extremely relevant.
I lost my card, went back to the pharmacy where I got the shot, and they filled me out a new one with no hesitation.
Uh, probably another US weirdness then. Over here SMS alerts are standard. Depending on the bank, there might be a tiny monthly fee for them. I just can't imagine someone charging my card and me not knowing about that immediately.
Damnit me too
It really depends.

I take this really just to mean "everyone has faults".

People often idealize heroes and think of them as beyond human. If you do that and met your hero then your illusion will often be shattered. But the problem is just that you were putting them on an unreasonable pedestal.

Of course some people are frauds and some people have no idea what they are doing but manage to make people think they do. But I didn't read this as being one of those situations. Just someone they saw as beyond human being only human.
On long road trips, the ~20 to ~25 minute stops for charging go by in a blink. You get out, stretch your legs, hydrate, maybe grab a bite to eat, use the restroom, and before you know it the charging is done. Sure, some stations like the Kettleman City Supercharger have a coffee bar and some other accoutrements, but you're not really there long enough to enjoy more than a quick walk through.

You could fire up Netflix on the car's screen, but most Netflix shows are longer than a charging session.

Maybe a future Quibi clone will find a new home in the Tesla app store.
> that Italy annexed and tried to screw over locals,

As an Italian: partial and partisan historic summaries do more harm than good.
I would encourage you to think more about the social use of "jokes". Once we get past the level of knock-knocks, jokes very often have social meaning. Look at people like George Carlin, for example. His "7 dirty words" routine was deeply political. It was a full-on assault on American government censorship and the cultural elements that demanded it. And looking at history, he's won. Humor can be very powerful.

Jokes can also be used the other way, for social control. Growing up, I heard a lot of racist and sexist jokes, the practical effect of which was to demean: to create a place and put disfavored people in it. I'm old enough that nerds were a similar group, and I remember being the butt of a lot of jokes. When that happens, you're just supposed to take it; any objection to being demeaned is met with, "Why so sensitive! It's just a joke!"

So in the case you cite, the problem wasn't him telling a joke. There are whole books full of jokes for speakers he could have used. It was him invoking rank sexist stereotypes and suggesting the solution to his inability to manage his feelings was to push women out of the labs that they've been working for decades to get equal access to. And indeed, are still working on. At my alma mater, just this week a CS professor was just pushed out after dozens of women complained about sexual harassment in recent years. [1] It took dozens because early complaints were dismissed. And there are far more stories of professors like that then there are of ones being booted for "joking" misogyny.

[1] https://www.michigandaily.com/news/walter-lasecki-resigns-ef...
I believe all of this, but isn't there some aspect where persistence has a different outcome than passivity? In your example where essentially you're saying the profit Amazon made off a customer is less than the refund cost and fallout of indifference. There are escalation paths that cost the company money, like stealing support time via repeatedly escalating, and eventually filing a dispute with the credit card issuer. These, too, cost Amazon money.
Vaccination aside, it will be interesting to see how live entertainment in general fares going forward. So much in our lives is a product of habits, both personal and group. The pandemic smashed those habits and kept them broken for a long period of time. Even if everyone was vaccinated tomorrow, how long, if ever, would it take for people to resume their old entertainment habits? I doubt movie theaters will ever recover, even if they're able to get the studios to embargo movies from streaming services (which is doubtful).

Live event with large crowds don't just have to contend with broken habits and losing out on the un-vaccinated, they also have the issue of lingering fears of crowds. Many people have reported that even thinking about their pre-pandemic life causes them anxiety when remembering how often they were in large crowds of people. The psychological impact of the pandemic has been so severe that they're projecting back the current fears of being in proximity with others. Doubt that goes away anytime soon.

There might be an initial burst of pent up energy by those least affected by the pandemic but once that wears off, that crowd isn't likely to be big enough to support live events at the pre-pandemic level. The pandemic has been a traumatic societal event that will take a long time to get past even after the danger of the virus is gone.
Are you using HN api
> If you are bringing in 10s of millions of dollars

What's even more fun is what happens when you do bring in those funds. It doesn't go directly to your research and you will have restrictions on how you can spend the money. Some organisations take between 0% and 70% of off the top. Then, they require you to spend your money on specific areas. We wanted disk space for storing some data. They wanted to charge us >$1/GB + cost of backups to store this data and we couldn't just go to AWS or any generic cloud vendor.
As a previous Data 'Scientist' I can tell you that it absolutely is.

Garbage in garbage out is the norm, the models are long established, but they can't mine gold from dirt. But nobody except the engineers seem to understand this.

I'm so glad I left to become a regular software engineer. My code does not depend on a blackbox that is fed with crap, and can be reliably tested.
I stumbled across The Congress when it was on Netflix and took a chance on it out of curiosity. It was such a wild ride, and stuck with me enough to watch it again a month or two later. I highly recommend the film, and especially to watch it without reading anything about it first.
I like the phrase “kill your heroes”. Not literally, of course. But in your mind. They are just flawed people like everyone else that happen to have been mythologized. Learning more about your heroes often leads to disappointment.
Tesla faces hefty fines in Norway for throttling its EV batteries – E&T Magazine
> (a 2-pound empty box? c'mon)

Yes, 2 lbs of packaging. It’s a $7000 camera. It’s well packaged. Even my $300 Canon was double boxed. (As are the customer’s photos of the packaging in the article)

The spec sheet of the a1 lists it as weighing 1.6 lbs. it lists the boxed weight as 3.22 lbs. This means the Sony packaging is 1.62 lbs.

The remaining 0.38 lbs is the packaging that Amazon put the Sony box in.

The math checks out.
What is wrong with making it up as you go? I mean everything I've ever built I had a notion of what I was doing but most of the real work was in the details. Anyone could say I was making it up as I go. I'd be like yeah, if I knew completely how to do it, I'd already be finished it.

Then there's the times where you think you know exactly what you're doing and after going down a road you realize it's the wrong way. Failing to learn and see the signs and make the embarrassing declaration that you got lost and need to turn around is never good. But some people just keep driving. It's hard though when there's a big line of cars behind you that think you actually know where you are headed.
I realize I phrased that incorrectly, I meant that a contract is only worth something if you can sue over it, and with $0 in damages (maybe not given the homeowner might be able to be comp’d for time or for money spent getting the permits) it wouldn’t make sense to sue Tesla over it.
Ok, now I want to know who the hell around me has a bunion. Please Social Media Algorithm, if you read this comment and can cross my HN account with whathever other information you have, I don't need a bunion remedy!
Special Investigation: Infiltrating the Election
Do it, if only to find Clojure.
Show HN: Connect Google forms & Notion – My Notion API experiment
The rest of the world is handing them money bags and they aren't supposed to rise in power?
Such a rocket would likely have two or more independent systems that would each have to agree on the adjustment, so one of them temporarily failing would not pose a problem. Though I doubt there are any rockets using database queries as part of their control system.

In those kinds of systems I suspect the approach is to enumerate every possible scenario and prove that the system behaves correctly in all of them, and if you can't do that, the system may be too complex and you need to redesign it to be simpler so that you can guarantee that it does not fail.
This is hilarious. The nazi's finally came. Regardless, China isn't nazi nor is it north korea.
http://archive.is/VwPKt
I’ve just kept a couple things, yeah; but usually I could have gotten a better deal if I purposely bought used or “renewed”, so the return is more about the price than the principle. For some things, I’d return anyway because the practice feels scammy and user-hostile.
This is true. I've had Amazon send me clearly used and damaged items although I ordered new. They also always block my negative review pointing this out, claiming that reviews are about the product and not about my experience of ordering it from Amazon.
Here is a Wikipedia page with additional information https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party
“Human nature, is what we are put on earth to overcome.”

--Katherine Hepburn, in The African Queen

A few of the good words to live by
I always say that's too hard for older devs like me to understand. Go easy on the elder abuse.
Understood. Thanks :)
To me about how these infractions can be enforced without suing though?
That's the thing, I've been trying to do that for years now. I've got about a dozen cool ideas that bounce around in my head and a new one every few months or so. I can spend all my non-free time thinking about and designing them in my head, but when it comes time to actually write the code, I just kinda lose all motivation.
You have a point, but if the company has a stated refund policy and its actual policy differs from that, then it can not in any way be regarded as just, IHMO.

(I have never bought anything expensive from Amazon, and so I have no idea what its stated policy is.)