skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The problem I see with this is that, to my friend, choosing to delete my Instagram account indicates that my principles for social media are more valuable than our friendship. In my case, the friendship wins out.

Irrespective of whether or not I choose to be on Instagram, they want to have an audience they will post for. They choose to play the social media game where I don't. That is their decision. In my mind, judging them based on the value of that decision sounds petty to me, and is probably futile. I do not think that imposing my morals on anyone who disagrees with me is the right option, and our attempts at moving the conversation off the platform have not succeeded anyway. If that's the platforms' defense mechanism, that making the users believe the networks are beneficial for them shuts out opinions to the contrary, then so be it.

I could think, "but if they were a true friend, they would put up with the inconveniences caused by interacting outside Instagram." I want to believe this is true, but I don't think how my friend spends their time or what platform they're motivated to use is a major indicator of the quality of our friendship. Legitimate best friends can still have Instagram accounts, the same as the "friends in name only" the networks would define. And if by this definition we are not actually true friends, then maybe that's a valid statement on my ability to find and maintain the correct friendships, or maybe it's just excess paranoia.

Also, they are the only person I've felt comfortable talking to, and they aren't part of a compensated or therapeutic relationship. That relationship is the value that Facebook supposedly holds. That is what they lend out to me when I ask for it.

And this is the very mechanism which Facebook uses to capture so many people's attention. I can go on and on over how I believe that social media is a net negative on society, and how it destroys my attention span if I give its other features enough credence, and yet I still have to use Instagram to have a chance at interacting with this person who has legitimately made a significant impact on my life elsewhere.

About all I can ask is what would incentivize them to stop using the platform if their usage has not reached pathological or mentally damaging levels, and I don't have an answer to that question.
Highly recommend “the wolf, the duck, and the mouse” which is written by Mac Barnett and illustrated by Jon Klassen. Absurd and funny.
According to a recent study reported by Reuters, child birth in a hospital setting is far safer: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-homebirths-newborn...

Skin-to-skin contact immediately after birth is pretty common in hospital settings now.

You shouldn't care about it all being a "lovely" or "natural" experience. You should care that everyone gets out safely. Birth can be a brutal and deadly affair.
Ah, I never imagined those logs are not public! We just moved from travis to actions. This is new to us.

Below is the command to run the test for REST APIs

https://github.com/nocodb/nocodb/blob/master/.github/workflo...

git clone https://github.com/nocodb/nocodb

and you can run the same command.
Yeah, a coworker convinced me to install Citizen and after a week or two I had to block its notifications. It was very consistent in keeping a distracting baseline volume going, regardless of the severity of the incidents. For a little while it was amusing in a voyeuristic way (oh good, someone else reporting a crackhead brandishing a stick two miles away, ahhh check out the nutjobs in the comments section), but ultimately totally useless to me, especially from a "personal safety" perspective. I guess I'm not the target market here.
sounds like Brane Cosmology
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane_cosmology
Phlogiston, now there's a word I haven't seen in a while.
A lot of big names on that list of superseded theories by the way :)
Ok thx for the reply

I was just dismayed to see the story sink so fast (but I get it now) — the article involves an interesting discussion of how scientific consensus is represented in the media and how it relates to social media, which seem like very HN-friendly topics… shame that so many are eager to flag something like this based on (as seems likely) some sort of forbidden-topic litmus test
I think they understated the importance and difficulty of retaining a sufficiently redundant skilled workforce to manage the equivalent cloud infrastructure.
The sun is "cooling" over the short term, we still have record temperatures.
The thing with hard drives: if chia bombs, you can still turn around and sell them on Ebay. And when they're 14tb+ drives, they'll retain their value for a decent time.

you can't do that with miners, and GPU's are still fairly specific components. But plenty of companies and people have all sorts of needs for extra space.

I mean - if we're going to be scaling anything... hard drives are the thing. And if there are any storage optimizations people come up with, those will only benefit the storage industry overall; unlike ASIC miners, for example.
It's still a wild west where people cling to sensationalism. I think the consequence is people grow up in it and form a tolerance. I know I have, I just assume an article's worth is inversely proportional to its controversy.
That's exactly how I feel about 4k TV or 48 or 60fps films. Unless it's sports or certain modern/comics action 720p with color depth seems about right. But as the Brian Eno quote says, it's what I'm used to or learned to like.

I remember I had one friend that when CDs came out didn't like them, but found that if he recorded them onto S-VHS tape sounded best of all, so he ended up using S-VHS like cassettes at home. In theory could have got a portable but that's taking it a step too far.
Though by analogy, people who are really serious about writing books for children should really make their own children, no?
"But that’s just Dropbox."

The implication here being, "Well, if Dropbox can save this much, then think about how much everyone else cans save!" But in fact the opposite is true. Dropbox sells disk storage on the cloud. For them to do so by effectively reselling someone else's disk-storage-on-the-cloud platform is obviously not high margin, and they'd be better off building it themselves. So, sure. Anyone else also offering, disk storage on the cloud, or compute clusters on the cloud, or otherwise just reselling someone else's product on the cloud, will probably have higher margins doing it themselves. But that is certainly not most companies. So, yeah, it's "just Dropbox".

Disclaimer: I work for a cloud provider, but these opinions are my own.
In general I agree. The VEARS system shields a lot of the liability for vaccines. There's really no legal reason not to report. In fact, they are required by law to report some types of reactions.

I think the main driver is a lack of understanding and education of how the system should be used.
Of course any migration has costs. But if they are higher because of deep entanglements in specific cloud vendor services, that is a vulnerability. It's already demonstrated that the big cloud providers will cut you off with little warning if you run afoul of their political sensibilities. So the only way to use those services is in the most generic way you can, so that migrations don't cost more because of it.
I picked flies as an extreme example but really any small animal is doing an immense amount of computing.

I just found this weird video of how a dragon flies brains act basically like a homing missile, using only a few dozen neurones: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0vRupFPw90
And? You use that as an excuse to go around labeling people because you don't like what they say?

Send me an email if you want to compare notes but don't leave punk ass comments like that.
It can be done. Putting the right abstractions in front of these services makes it possible to migrate and replacements exist. Okay, granted, there will be complexity in self hosted infra but it is possible.
I think the link between 1 floating point operation and 1 synapse is probably a bit dubious.
They're basically talking about helping SaaS providers reduce their IaaS spending. They're not talking about migrating off SaaS.
The theory that "SARS-CoV-2 leaked from the Wuhan lab" overlaps some with the theory that "SARS-CoV-2 was man-made", but they're not the same thing. According to the article Facebook's policy change is towards posts saying "SARS-CoV-2 was man-made". Did Facebook's policy ban posts which supported the "lab leak" theory but didn't claim the virus was "man-made"?

Facebook's April 2020 covid-19 policy notice only mentions "man-made". https://about.fb.com/news/2020/04/covid-19-misinfo-update/
police are also known to intentionally downgrade or even discourage crime reports to improve statistics. this can either be overt ("do you really want to file a report for that?) or the result of no one giving a fuck the last time you bothered to report a crime. I'm sure there are a lot of misunderstandings or flat-out fabrications that make it onto citizen. I'm also quite certain there are a lot of crimes that are observed but don't get officially documented. maybe this is a wild thing to say, but I'm actually not 100% sure who I trust less between official police records and random community members.
I have a Ring and the Neighbors app. 99% of the "incidents" are people sharing the coyote or fox in their yard, scared about the "rabid wolf" in their yard. Meanwhile we've actually had a murder, bank robbery and dead body found in a park in the last 3 months, and only a quick bleep about any of those incidents.

The app, or rather the "community" behind it, is worthless for any "news" or public safety alerts. If it wasn't integrated with the app to view my own camera's feeds, it would be gone from my phone. Any time there is anything of note, it's filled with garbage nonsense comments that are at best terrible attempts at humor, or vile and repugnant at worst.

-10/10, would not recommend.
> the system Citizen uses to create incidents and push them out to users

Gives me watch dog vibes too. Sounds more like a CRUD app though.
Thanks for speaking this out loud. I've been feeling the same thing. What's weird is I've been having identical conversations with people from multiple US states and several European countries. There used to be an enormous gap between people from different areas and countries, each existing in their own cultural bubble. Now that's changed, and I'm not talking about "closer" I'm talking "the exact same."

Our opinions have always been easily shaped by the media, mass entertainment and political campaigning. But lately it seems like there's less an ocean of information and more like a small puddle we're all trying to drink from at once. At the same time, the Overton Window seems to be slamming shut.

I have been suspecting this has all been a dress rehearsal for the societal changes that are coming soon to address climate change, a sort of "powering up" of the collective consciousness.
{
"a": [
{ "b": "foo" },
{ "c": "bar" }
]
}

vs.

{
"a": [
{ "b": "too" },
{ "c": "bar" },
{ "b": "uh oh" }
]
}
This is probably outside your wheelhouse, but do you happen to know why the Persian word with a single N would have come into Greek with a reduplicated N?
You have not addressed the content of the article. You are making appeals to authority. Do you see the issue here?
Good thing they aren't monopolies, then. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Twitch, TikTok, and Reddit are are all very popular places for people to post their views. And that's not counting the myriad lesser places like the one we're using now. And of course anybody can drop a few bucks on a blog of their own.

I also disagree that sites moderating is against the intent. Freedom of speech is one right, but so is freedom of association. Should HN be required by law to platform anybody with an "unpopular fringe opinion"? I'd say no. Using government power to force participation in speech someone finds odious is just as bad as using government power to shut down speech.
That makes sense and also explains why that Reddit thread had users describing multiple extensions as the source of the same problem.

So the root issue here is effectively extension squatting on the Edge store. The attacker can simply scrape the most popular extensions in Chrome, inject malware into them, and publish them on the Edge store under the same name.

If that’s what’s happening, there is probably substantial effort behind sockpuppet publishers so that one ban won’t ban them all. But then again it also looks like an amateur operation if every extension is footprinting itself by using the same domain for the malicious redirect.

Hopefully Microsoft can clean this up with some one-off code scans for the signatures of this malware. Ban all the publishers and delete the extensions. Then, hold those names in reserve unless the creator can prove they own the same name at the Chrome store.

Long term, the ideal system might involve a verification step at registration time if the publisher name or extension name exists in the Chrome store. I think npm has been working on features in this area, as they are vulnerable to similar namesquatting vectors of malware distribution.
It is true that an individual can live as carbon-neutral and eco-friendly as possible without making nary a dent on global warming. However it is also true that all of these individuals have the power to elect people who can to do something. One very simple example I can think of that happened in recent history was Trump pulling the US out of the 2015 Paris agreement on climate change mitigation. If the public at large were educated on the subject, there would be widespread outrage and a lot of pressure NOT to do this - but his base leaned heavily climate-change-sceptic so it was A-OK (bonus: it really triggered the libs which would go down well even with Trump fans who are undecided on climate change). Now, would that agreement alone fix everything and arrest climate change? Probably not, but getting the world to agree on something was one step in the right direction.
Phone wallpapers are social signifiers for sighted people.
But there are no tests behind this command?
But the hard disks are general purpose storage devices, right? Any chance they will become custom ASIC storage that can't be repurposed too?
The drives are reportedly destroyed from the process relatively rapidly. So no, I’d probably not plan to be able to resell drives on eBay later.
I can only agree with in the way that the games do not exactly model "real life". I guess whoever had such a model would likely exploit it for personal gain rather than making a good video game.

Still, the better sophisticated MMORPGS (e.g. AO, or EVE) tend to mimick it as much as possible. Resources may seem unlimited at first sight but these games actually try to implement a universe that offers limited resources and a monetary system that responds to offer and demand, and may be subject to inflation/deflation. Failing to achieve this exposes game owners to attrition by loyal gamers (e.g. sudden price drops/increases in rare objects).

Also, AO was exposed to a hack that involved duplicating objects (I think it was in 2013), the exploitation of this vulnerability triggered a cascade of events that resulted in the deflation of the currency in the game and took months to be fixed. Again, this also raised attrition amongst gamers.

In some online universes, resources are scarce enough so that players engage in the trading of virtual goods through external transactions (i.e. virtual items paid through real money). This also tends to affect the internal currency in the game.

You mentioned the "shelter" example. I think this is where we get an analogy with State intervention (i.e. taxes) when the players do not allocate resources to actually set up theses infrastructures in the virtual universe.

I agree with you, it is an imperfect imitation of our world. But acknowledging this as formally insufficient/imperfect would require acknowledging that we actually understand what characterizes and constitutes our reality, and that we can somehow infer that a theoretical model is unsustainable without even testing it. I think that if I were to accept this, that would mean I surrender and stop believing there are better models :)
Writing Tools for the 21st Century
Yeah well you know Jews are literally Nazis now because they want one country where Muslims also allowed to live and Muslims already eradicated Jews from the rest of the Middle East and Arabia and will kill them if they try to emigrate, but they're the victims

Free Palestine! /s

The best part of this post is camping the nickname.

Death to jihadis!
>Gene Hoffman, the president of Chia Network, the company behind the currency, admits that “we’ve kind of destroyed the short-term supply chain”, but he denies it will become an environmental drain.
> So what's wrong with "dark matter" as a name?

it encodes a normative, biased prejudgement about what we think explains the syndrome.
thanks for answering my question. wow, "wipe the upgrade and charge for it again"... what a racket smh
Software development is about managing complexity. Think about it like this. If the number of lines of code in a piece of software is N, then the amount of effort required for managing that software is N^2 (or N^1.5, or whatever). Some people believe that by properly organizing software development, you can minimize or completely get rid of the exponential growth of the complexity. The idea is that the amount of effort for managing software containing N lines of code should be N.

Microservices tries to organize software so that complexity is minimized. In my experience, they completely fail to do so. Rather they actually increase the complexity by putting related pieces of systems far apart from each other. I think it is better to "embrace the complexity" and to concede that software development is difficult. Better developer tools and stronger developers are better methods for dealing with complexity than in vain trying to minimize complexity.
This is probably because Linux has a much finer tuned scheduler for multiples cores and multiples threads per-core. Linux dominates the HPC market for more than a decade and, as current workstations approach features of supercomputers from decades ago, the better scheduler begins to shine.

Also, considering how much Linux dominates on servers, it is very likely that IO latency or throughput, depending on the case, is top.

I don't expect windows to be better except for some memory heavy applications given it is mostly used on the desktop and has probably memory management features that are adequate for this use case.

It is a shame that for AAA games we still live with a virtual monopoly controlled by the option which is not the highest performant. Specially considering how gamers like to brag about their machines and setup to extract the last drop of performance. It would be interesting if gamers forced the industry to bow to the most advanced solution. Developers, HPC, servers and embedded people were successful doing exactly that.
I don't know how every company does it. But I led the datacenter and networking teams at Square from 2011 to 2017. In that time we went from 1 DC cage with 4 server racks to 4 US DCs, one in a Japan and a couple of network pops. A bit more than 100 server racks total.

My team had 2 guys doing SiteOps. They would travel to the various DCs in the Bay Area and Virginia and do all the maintenance, new installs, etc. And sometimes we'd lean on the colocation remote hands to do a few things.

We had about 5 network engineers, that also handled the corporate network. (12 offices and a network backbone that connected east and west coast DCs, offices, etc).

And maybe 2 SWEs who handled things like our host OS install system, etc. Basically the next layer above the hardware.

So 9 people that were required to run all of that stuff. But really, NetEng ended up spending like 70% of their time on corporate network things because we'd add offices faster than datacenters.

So if we focused on production only, we really needed about 6 or 7 people total.

I did the math a few times (every single year) and compared our costs, including people, to the costs of moving to AWS 3 year reserve instances.

Doing it ourselves was always half the price.

Of course the difference here was we built on-prem from the start. So there was no repatriation that had to happen.

Since then, I've been responsible for large cloud infra on all 3 major providers and learned a lot about what kind of discounts you can get when you're in the double digit millions in annual spend.

I still think, at a scale of single digit thousands of servers, you'd be cheaper on-prem, fully loaded. But admittedly, I haven't run the numbers since 2017.
What's wrong with it being a lovely experience?

Couldn't we assume that OP's hierarchy includes the "everyone gets out safely" box having been ticked?

This is like saying cars should not be enjoyable because they exist purely to move us around.
Do I understand this correctly, that you can only make likes invisible to yourself?

This seems about as useful as the "if you don't like it, just pretend it isn't there" school of moderation - namely not useful at all.

Humans are social beings and acutely aware of status indicators. A like count is a status indicator, even if a stupid one.

By hiding the count for everyone, the indicator would be removed, which I imagine could actually make some change. But if a user can only remove the count for themselves, fully knowing that everyone else is still seeing it, I don't see how anything more is archieved than putting thrm as a disadvantage and potentially causing even more anxiety.
Thanks for your report.

With regards to Swagger thing, we allow to create multiple projects within same schema too! And this happens in NC_DB only - I imagine we 've an issue with Swagger related model creation. This should be straight forward.

At row edit part - we will work on your feedback.
It's one more example of how yesterday's "misinformation" can become tomorrow's "information", and how dangerous it is for sites to censor entire conversations because they (or their so-called 'fact checkers') believe in one side of a narrative.

Will there be apologies given to the people banned, isolated from participating in socialization during a pandemic where online communication was a vital tool for human connection?
Is that a serious question? Here's a better one:

Who has the right to tell others what they may, and may not, decide for themselves?
I thought the UI for MSFS in VR was awful.

Though I think some of that may be because of the game controller I use. It's an Astro C40, which due to driver issues, can't decide to tell Windows if it's an XBox 360 controller or an actual Astro C40. If it identifies as a C40, then games don't know what it is and don't have any default bindings and I have to configure it all, and with a game like MSFS 2020, there's a lot to bind. But also, lately, I've been having an issue with it deciding that the controller only has two buttons and nothing else, not even analog sticks.

But I digress...

I think MSFS in VR would be a LOT better if it gets support for controller-free hand tracking, like the Leap Motion. I'd still use a game controller for the main inputs (Flight stick, brakes, rudder, probably throttle as well), but I'd love to be able to just reach and flip light switches, turn dials, etc.
The only mysteries here are:

1. The certainty that an infinite entity (universe) can be determined to have a very specific percentage (80%) of something (dark matter)

2. The fact that the big bang is still being considered and cited as the beginning (?) of the universe

3. That we have accepted terms such as "dark" matter and "dark" energy in science as if some witchcrafty comes into play, as if lord voldemort created the cosmos.