skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If people are nice to each other in a way that makes them hard for you to beat, surely it is you who are playing the worse strategy by not doing the same?

If the arguments that underly the strategy decisions taken during the game purely happen during the game, that's perfectly fine. The issue arises when you absolutely cannot do anything to influence those. Rules of games are designed not designed to account for external behaviours that might favour

Eg: If Alice, Bobo and Charlie are playing a game of Risk and Alice is in love with Bob in real life and won't do anything in the game to hurt him. What can Charlie really do ? The rules of Risk have been designed to give each player with equal skill roughly 33% chance of winning - as they should. But in this case, Bob is almost sure to win and Charlie has very little things he can do to change that. How is that fun for Charlie ?
I’m slightly surprised to see this line of thinking in HN. The so-called “Belief” in science is not driven by blind faith that what people are saying are true. It’s that you understand that before something is believed it goes through a rigorous system of fact checking / experimental confirmation. So if something is considered by people from different fields as true, then it likely is. But as you said, it’s questioning and skeptical so if new data is put forward then it can adjust. Science isn’t just about being right, it’s a system of truth finding and understanding.
Radix Staking and Incentive Rewards
> If you believe you are not religious, it just means that you don’t have the cognitive tools to recognize the secular ideology that you have adopted.

This is a poisonous reversal of reality, to the extent that I wonder if you're just trolling.

Fact is, more religious people, especially the evangelical Christian sect that is most vocal and influential in America, is not about examining implicit beliefs, nor is it open to debate. It's about falling into line, and adopting a strict set of ideological beliefs that are not negotiable. In fact, religion is often explained in terms of faith as an opposition to analysis: after all, if your first principle is that you believe in something, why question further?

In contrast, modern secular culture, although not immune to tribalism and ideological blindness, is much more open to building belief through analysis and understanding, i.e. the scientific method.
Believe it or not, I believe you too
Atheism believes in many gods
This is an extremely ignorant position that trivializes "religion". First of all, as I have written elsewhere, everyone is religious.

-- I can't see how that statement doesn't trivialize religion at least as much. IE, if everyone is "religious", you've set a very low bar for what qualifies as religious

I think made it clear you have religious beliefs, which involve ... clearly false views of the cosmos (with the possible exception of Buddhism) and you have religious institutions, which serve a variety of social, economic and psychological purposes. A church can be club with a few nods to God or it can be something like a political party hell bent on power or it can be other things. Many American Unitarians maintain the form of religion while dropping all the God part and that's as fine as anything as far as I'm concerned.
> something which has to be taken on faith by everyone

- corona absolutely can't be a lab leak, and will be banned by social media as a conspiracy theory

- flimsy masks and t-shirts prevent the spread of corona according to govt. officials

Oh wait ...
News is literally a story we tell each other to reinforce beliefs about the world.

Truth has no relation to news and news is not about observation of fact.

Even if you witness events yourself, your understanding of what occurred is a narrative you tell, not truth.

All truths and history are interpretations within religious (or ideological) frameworks. Truth as we use the word is not attainable.

There are no exceptions to this!
That's a surprisingly arrogant and troll-tier comment. If you don't like it, can't you just turn it off, or write your own editor (which Rob Pike has done at least twice)?

Does Rob Pike also eschew error messages which point out the error's line number as a crutch for weak-minded coders? Does he avoid modern plotting software, opting instead to parse vast monochrome tables of numbers the way god intended? Does he oppose multiple virtual desktops, window systems, and GUIs in general because he grew up without these newfangled shortcuts that cause mental decrepitude in kids these days? He might be a genius who has made an exceptionally positive impact on computing, but he comes off as a bit of a dick in that thread.

Using color to encode meaning is "juvenile" for a reason: it's an efficient way to leverage the builtin pattern recognition features of the human visual system.
So the mRNA Sars shots alter your DNA. Ok thanks for that.
2 of the 10 people who worked on the analysis are at Oxford. The rest are affiliated to CERN, Milano-Bicocca, EPFL and Manchester
I would be very interested in hearing more about what changed your outlook.
> But they did not, themselves, perceive the two sounds as being different sounds.

This makes sense, thanks. I guess we generally don't perceive the different sounds in our languages, like an English speaker generally won't perceive the difference between t͟hə and t͟hē (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/the for audio).
I had an otherwise enjoyable conversation with a just recently-turned-religious person. As soon as core tenets, as you nicely put it, where up for discussion, conversation came to a screeching halt. People who think the ten amendments must be strictly followed have a lot of cognitive dissonance to resolve, and reasoning is not welcome.

The same person asked me into great detail why vaccinations should be a good idea, and expected me to provide all the answers.

We both remained at our positions - she‘s now contemplating homeschooling her kid because of mask requirements, and I still don’t believe in a religion that says my gay friends need to become straight.
>In fact to be unswedish is not just a common idiom it’s a positive one. It’s when you don’t show the typical negative Swedishness. You aren’t “accused” of it, you are congratulated.

One wonders how a people reaches this level of demoralization.
Regardless of whether "everyone is religious," everyone certainly has revelatory beliefs, i.e. beliefs that were not reasoned to.

Christian thinkers have spilled a lot of ink attempting to clarify the boundary between reason and revelation whereas, in the secular world, many people do not seem to understand that many of their beliefs (particularly the foundational ones) are revealed.
I've heard from a friend (in Australia) if you don't frequently buy placement you get bumped, and buying placement can be a losing proposition. They raise the price to squeeze all margin so it's just on the edge of making it affordable. You have to say yes to losing money during the promotion ("you'll make it up with brand awareness!") to claw it back by staying on the shelves in between. Otherwise another brand, or sometimes a house brand, takes your place.
This thread has derailed.
Did not intend to troll. The “cognitive tools” are the ability to discern which beliefs are religious in nature: taken on faith, ritualistic, ethical , etc.

Again I’m not saying that religion is better or worse. Actually this is a defense of religion as a framework for defining belief.

I’m arguing that secularism when taken on face value lacks the tools to recognize it’s own belief system.
this is wrong, because land is inelastic.

you can tax land value at 100% and there will be no less land.
I don't think it's bogged down processing. It is explicitly muting the audio as part of the reversing protocol to avoid distractions, and possibly to let you hear other sounds such as from a parking assistance system.
Try simulating this:
Start with bunch of objects at coordinates 0,0,0. Give them random velocities from 0 to c. Then just let them move according to Newtons laws of motion, ignore gravity.

Now focus on single random object and narrow down your field of view so you won't see the edge. Look at other objects. They will seem to be moving away directly from the point you focused on with velocities proportional to distance from it.

I made such simulation and calculated that the relative velocities of other points face directly away from the point I'm observing. And they really do.

There's definitely a center of this system, yet from the point of view of any object far enough from the edge to not be able to see it, it seems like there's no center and other objects just move away from us, and from each other with speed proportional to the distance.
In this example Charlie has failed to consider the metagame of "don't be a third wheel"
JPEG XL is already in the latest Chrome behind a developer flag:

chrome://flags

Search for `jxl` (pronounced "jixel") and enable it. Then visit https://jpegxl.info/ as well as the gallery: https://jpegxl.info/jxl-art.html
Why does a trust like this not run afoul of the rule against perpetuities? [1]

Is it because as long as there are living directors, they can technically vote to change the rules? Who would these directors for the Crown Estate be? The Queen? Parliament? A person at the top of the management chain?

Is there an actual mechanism (other than tradition, good will, etc.) that prevents the entity managing/controlling the Crown Estate from voting to change the rules about how it's governed and who gets what proceeds?

It seems that the answer to this question is that an act of Parliament could (probably?) change the rules, therefore it's not a perpetuity, and the share to the monarch is a tradition that they just aren't inclined to change right now.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_against_perpetuities
Yes, I've not seen docs pointing to any other way...
If a highly-skilled individual wants to amass the most monetary wealth possible, which geographies do you think would be better than the USA and why?
Not really if the initial speeds were random from 0 to c. Some stuff would leave but some would stay relatively close.

And you wouldn't be able to tell what's your speed when you look at how other stuff moves. Everythin would look like moving away from you with speed proportional to the distance.
What's the negative effect of not having the gene for Huntington disease?
Apple’s statement is pretty clearly corporate BS because the internal email makes it clear the primary reason for the biased search results was the “manual boost”

> “We are removing the manual boost and the search results should be more relevant now,” wrote Apple app search lead Debankur Naskar
> and there's no reason why the new republican government couldn't just seize the Estate as part of this abolishment.

once the precedent has been set, how about they seize your family's assets too?
I read the tone as insecurity. Hey look at me, I figured this out. Aren't I smart? All these previous people are dumb. Right? Right!? RIGHT!?!
That’s what really struck me too - just seeing how excited they were. It made me think we really need to protect and encourage more people to love science that much!
It's not just a range, but the overall kinematic situation. It's referred to as the no escape zone, or more informally "the basket" from what I've read.
“Men are better than gates” - Gandalf - the real security on the surgery rooms are those in them.
This is right up the highway from us. The lake is really, really low. I have never seen it that low.
Usually we read a story about a vehicle turning up in a creek after low water levels, but this is the first time that I can remember an airplane turning up.

hopefully they can figure out where it came from and find some closure. (it's very likely the missing one from 1965.)
>News is made up of things that literally happened and often have video proof.

In an ideal situation maybe, but very frequently it is manipulation. Videos are taken out of context or outright modified to fit a narrative. When you watch the complete video it is very often different than the 10 second clip shown on the so called news.

> Religion is made up of things that did not happen and have no evidence

Do you believe everything in the Bible is false or just certain parts? If you believe certain parts are accurate then I don't see how it is any different than news in your view.
> The secular world would benefit from adopting more formal definitions of their belief system. I think that would reduce the conflict and neurosis that comes from engaging a nebulous system.

If it did that, it wouldn't be able to use it a source of social control. What we have is a society of true believers, that's why they can't see it as a religion, it's just reality to them. I really don't think you can be a true believer and call your religion anything but "reality," especially a "religion."

Anyway, there have been some attempts at documenting American religion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_civil_religion

> If you believe you are not religious, it just means that you don’t have the cognitive tools to recognize the secular ideology that you have adopted.

I think there are still a few people who aren't religious and I don't really think your criterion here is the most useful. It just begs the question.
The end result is still a picture
A good old read with some mildly outdated, but still interesting info. As a side note, if you dig aviation, check out my shop https://bvr.design. =D
Hopefully you don’t have to spend the time again - but if you do it’s very easy to buy the fireman’s key on eBay. You didn’t hear that here.
> Born to and raised by Australian mother

I really don't think most people care about the fact she has an Australian mother. In fact, I myself had forgotten that fact. If she hadn't, I don't think it would really make a difference to how she is viewed in Australia. (My mother was born in Scotland but calling myself “Scottish” feels weird, like the real Scots are going to call me out for being a fake one.)

Virginia Roberts Giuffre has been called an "Australian" by the Australian media (e.g. [0]) even though as far as I am aware she has no Australian ancestry. She is also married to an Australian man but I think you are putting more emphasis on that fact than what counts. Most Australians, if they think of her as an Australian, it is because she has adopted this country as her homeland through immigration, not because she married an Australian. If she married an Australian but stayed in the US, nobody would think of her as Australian. If she had moved here as a single person, or with a non-Australian husband, people probably still would.

In somewhat of the reverse, the British politician Patricia Hewitt was born in Australia and grew up here, but I'd probably think of her as British first and Australian very much second. The country in which she has lived the bulk of her adult life, and in which she has had her political career, is more significant in identifying her than where she was born and raised.

[0] https://www.watoday.com.au/national/western-australia/virgin...
Only if you assume that these big companies are owned by a few people. They could be as equally distributed as small businesses nullifying the effect. Though since the USA is quite unequal comparing to Europe, it probably is not.
"A lie is a truth that you just don't believe in" - Conan O'Brien
Except that detectability is an advantage, in the doesn't-set-off-global-thermonuclear-war sense. If your nuclear (or command) assets can be removed at any time without enough warning to launch, that means you have to launch now before that happens.

If you want to hit something with a conventional warhead in a non-peer state without warning, why not use a stealthy cruise missile instead?
You can also "noun" verbs. One I hear in SV is "an ask". I find myself a bit peeved by it but I don't know why.
> surprisingly arrogant

So, a Googler, and a Go language designer. Checks out.
I mean, sure, that's fine. Most laws around what things people and corporations are and aren't allowed to do are trade offs. You can build a company and make lots of money, but you have to obey a set of restrictions. If you're not ok with those restrictions, then you don't build a company. That's fine. There are certainly other people who will accept somewhat lower profits (due to these restrictions) in exchange for having the opportunity to make money at all.

The pretty well-known examples of these sorts of restrictions are things like minimum wage laws, child labor laws, anti-discrimination laws, etc. Antitrust law is on there too, and in my opinion it should be expanded to cover some of the stuff we're talking about here. You seem to not agree, and that's fine. But personally I think we should be doing more to protect customers, even from things they may not realize are hurting them. Right now the only serious choices for a smartphone are iPhone or Android, and while they both have a lot of good things going for them, they also both have significant negatives. I don't want the future to be a techno-dystopia where there is only one "choice", and the manufacturer dictates how we use our devices. It really feels like that's where things are going, though, unless we start requiring platforms be more open. Customers won't demand it, because most of them don't understand the issues around it, so it's likely the only solution is legislation.
As a member of a society there are ground rules you are obliged to abide by in order to participate. The upshot is Apple makes 10s of billions per year while abiding by those standards.

It's a pretty fantastic deal if you can get it and I don't think if regulations on manipulation of the app market is tightened up it would be an undue burden.

You seem to be imagining that a trillion dollar business is just a really big version of a small business so you imagine storming off in a fit of pique but it's really not a bigger version it's a different animal because it's wealth gives it so much power it is in need of greater restraint internal or external and it's massive payroll and base gives it greater obligation to it's customers and staff.

Anyone who would do such a thing would just find themselves looking for a new job after the stockholders fired them.
> If you believe you are not religious, it just means that you don’t have the cognitive tools to recognize the secular ideology that you have adopted

Or maybe you have a different definition of "religious" than I do? But no, it must be that I lack the right cognitive tools. Sheesh.
Do you have access to your production database?

How do you write tests? With what data are you testing?

How do you handle backwards compatibility? (For the code? For the data?)

Do you do this upgrade during deployment? Can you do blue/green deployments? What about canary deployments?

Is this transaction where you are dropping the old and creating the new part of the code or part of the database? (the actual code that does this)

How do you profile the performance of the said code?
Except it IS segregated from an advertiser PoV (aka companies that don't want to attach their ads to that sort of content can opt out of it when setting up their ad campaigns).
The pretend code on the laptop screen is user-editable
You are confusing secularism with naturalism.
I have Celiac. It took until I was in my early 20s to learn that. When I ate wheat as a kid, I would throw up. But it would happen 24-48 hours later, so no one ever figured it out. I'm shorter than my siblings, and for me it impacted me a lot more mentally than physically.

The reason it's increasing is that we've chosen to make wheat proteins much more durable to reduce the susceptability to pests (thanks, Norman Borlaug). This makes them more durable, and for most people doesn't make their body attack itself.

But for the 13% of people who have an anti gliadin gene, you find yourself on an autoimmune spectrum ranging from Celiac (one diagnostic criteria: flat intestinal villi) to many other things that can manifest when impossible to digest proteins are routinely consumed.

If you don't have the gene, it is very unlikely you're actually allergic to wheat. If you do, it's a straight line, one gene to one protein allergy, ranging in severity of presentation.

It's estimated that 1% of people actually have Celiac-as-diagnostic criteria, but 13% have the anti gliadin protein gene(s) (HLA-DQ2.5 and HLA-DQ8) making it bad for you.
Tether can crash the entire crypto market. It has maybe 2% in cash for the total amount of coins. It's unregulated, offshore vaporware... and could be the only thing preventing BTC from crashing to zero. Exit scam on deck...
Surely that's BBC BASIC

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_BASIC
> All truths and history are interpretations within religious (or ideological) frameworks. Truth as we use the word is not attainable.

Is this statement in the set of "all truths ... within religious (or ideological) frameworks" or is it an exception, as it were, to the rule?
> However, the slow down only affects Pythons built with --enabled-shared anyway.

On Gentoo, the ebuild for Python and Ruby both have --enable-shared hardcoded.

Also, if you use prebuilt Ruby binaries from RVM, those were also built with --enable-shared. And if you build your own Ruby binaries with ruby-build, it also does --enable-shared.

So, there are still plenty of opportunities around for instant speedup.
I don't know who "most people" are but if you are conflating science with values (I did a quick look up of the definition of "scientism") you are doing it wrong - and it isn't science. This reminds me of a video I watched once. An author named Sam Harris wrote an entire book titled The Moral Landscape that supposedly (I haven't read the book) makes the argument that science can precisely inform our value judgments . A physics professor named Sean Carol confronted him publicly on his views and explained the demarcation between values and science. Each time Sean would pin him down Sam would squirm around and change the topic or miss the point. I don't think most people agree with Sam Harris's view (which from what I've read embody what you are talking about) , but at the same time I don't think most people care about any of this stuff either way. :)
From my person experience, religious people have scammed/hurt me to the most in life and business.
There are no PCBs in PTFE/Teflon, what are you talking about? Also the soy thing is nonsense.
> From what I’ve gathered, actual devices market share, in the US, is closer to (and less than) 50%.

iOS has 60% of the market in the US[1].

[1] https://www.pcmag.com/news/ios-more-popular-in-japan-and-us-...
The good old correlation is not causation clearly applies here.

IMHO, religions is at the same time archaic and something deeply rooted in human nature, but like many primitive instincts it can be mastered.
I remember one time there were two articles on the front page of HN. One says "If you want to be more productive, be more happy", then you scroll down and you find "If you want to be more productive, be more depressed".

Take a look at this article for example https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/aug/27/religion-why-is...

Determining if religion is declining or rising is more complex than just making a poll.
Oh that...just some more treason. Nothing to see here.