skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkeS_EAIpv4

This is much better at describing how this can be used in the real world. A mesh network in town lets people communicate/post videos/etc.
The unfortunate truth about IQ is that the distribution is on both sides of the mean. Some people are unteachable, but it sounds like you want to ignore the inconvenient.
> Battery raising is disrespectful.

Towards chicken? Maybe. But chicken isn't the only variable in the equation. I agree it'd be much less wasteful to grow meat in bioreactor without even wasting energy on growing feathers, organs and whatnot. But we're not there yet, and we might have a hard time feeding people without chicken factories.
Complex social lives of orcas revealed by drone observations
Can you elaborate more? I understand that they didn’t invent memetic desire (no one did it’s a innate human behavior from girard pov) but don’t understand the second portion of your comment
How do you come to the conclusion that they are hiding badly? Assuming they are there and they are in fact hiding, I think they are pretty good at it. Or do you have reliable photo or video evidence that suggests otherwise? :-)
FWIW, there's a resources page with a number of links that match your inquiry: https://aes67.app/resources

Unfortunately the standard itself you have to buy. It's 50 USD for non-AES-members.

https://www.aes.org/publications/standards/
That's an overly general statement. Can you do that for front-end code that stores all of its state elsewhere? Sure. Can you do it for a storage system? Absolutely freaking not. If you introduce a bug that loses or corrupts data, there's no going back. You will have committed the worst sin that somebody in that specialty can commit. Better to test as much as you can, at every level. Other kinds of code are often somewhere in between.

Also, even if it's true that being live will exercise more edge cases etc., it's a terrible way to test changes during early development. For one thing, there's no isolation. It becomes harder to determine which of several recent changes caused a problem, and that burden unfairly falls on the person who's on call instead of the person who introduced the error. And decent unit/functional tests allow "dumb" mistakes (we all make them) to be caught earlier than waiting in a deploy queue, allowing faster iteration. "Most recent change probably caused the problem" is a very useful heuristic, but the more low-assurance changes you allow in the less useful it becomes.

To drive the point home even further: I have found data-loss bugs in focused testing that didn't show up in prod for months. I know because in many cases I was able to add logging for the preconditions when I fixed the bug. No logs for months, then some completely unrelated and completely valid change by another engineer tickles the preconditions and BAM. That would have been an absolute nightmare for other members of my team, possibly even after I was gone. Based on those experiences, I will never believe that foregoing systematic early tests can be valid. The systems most of us work on are too complex for that.

"Test in prod" only works for trivial code and/or trivial teams. Not in the grown-up world.
The affordable care act would have been killed under that and replaced with nothing.

While in principle checking in on laws seems nice, a mandatory review deadline or it goes away would not be a viable solution in our current political climate.

But even in a more ideal climate, it seems that Congress would be tied up with the reviews and have no time to actually address new or contemporary issues.

Perhaps if it was structured so that a small percentage of laws were randomly selected and some check was enacted so that a minority couldn’t easily kill the law.
Thank you for taking a stand.
> Meet isn't much integrated into Chrome

Again, how would you know that? There is no reasonable way you could possibly know that.
This is LAN audio streaming right? Like the kind of thing you'd use at a venue. Not internet radio.
Ignoring the blatant disregard for the safety of others, your calculations are off the mark.

The Delta variant is the only one you should be concerned about from here on. And a single dose of vaccine only provides minimal protection against it.

For your scheme to be safe, you would need about 80% of people around you to have 2+ doses of a high-efficacy vaccine, and ideally all with Pfizer over Astra, given their relative efficacy.

There's a greater than zero risk you're going about this wrong and will end up catching a new variant.
Vaccination works, if you ACTUALLY GET THE SHOTS.

Cheers
This is HN. Imo, shilling is fine if it's open, honest and relevant to the discussion.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#:~:text=Ple....
Maybe they are waiting for a study on “Brain imaging before and after Covid-19 Vaccination...”
Many of these difficult kids are legit toxic to everyone around them. They make life hell for other students and any of the faculty that dares interact with them.

At my school of ~2,000 I'd say at any given moment there would be at least 30 of these kids (they didn't last long). They were violent. They hit teachers. They were regularly dragged out of classes by police officers. After a few of these interactions, they would be transferred to the problem child school. Our school actually had some great teachers that really cared about the students, but many of these kids were broken. Their home lives were just horrid. Most ended up in juvie and later jail.

Those were the worst of the bunch, but a good 20% of the school was beyond help. Daily fights, constant police presence, tons of kids brought weapons to school, lots of theft, vandalism every day, I could go on... That school was a nightmare, and it wasn't even the worst one in the city.

Point is, there is nowhere near enough teachers and resources to fix these broken kids. Their broken homes are what need to be fixed.
They're called Republicans and Libertarians.

(And yes, monied interests have Many Dems in their back pockets as well.)
The pilots are expert in flying and no doubt in-the-moment aerial observation; but its not clear why we need to take their opinion as final and impartial in post-event video analysis.
This what economists call "moral hazard." Simply, you get more of what you reward. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard

What are the effects of mortgage interest payments being tax deductable, and given these, what do you think the effect of ransoms being deductable will be?

If this policy weren't just dumb, it would be like these government people actually just want to create more chaos so they can direct it at target groups then only selectively respond to it as a way to paralyze opposition. Not to be political, but any sufficiently idiotic policy is indistinguishable from partisanism, imo.
It also depends on the domain.

Try out a brand new stack on a weekend project? Yes please.

Give my child a brand new drug that supposedly helps them concentrate on school their work? Hard pass.
The person you're a closest match to, could have a closer match to someone else. Same with their closest match, and so on.
> Second, trans activists can not understand that there is a huge number of women who are not comfortable with the fact that anyone can say they identify as a woman and do things like observe them naked.

Yes, they can.

Trans activists will respond to this with something like “public restrooms, lockerrooms, etc., should not assume that everyone is a cisgender heterosexual and that sexual violence occurs only in the direction if normal attraction, and should provide sufficient privacy and safety for the fact that genser identity, attraction, and sexual violence targets are not determined by sex assigned at birth.”

I would hazard a guess that there are few groups of people who are more aware of, and have spent more energy on considering comprehensive rather than shallow solutions for, this issue than trans activists.
I'd choose the 4x7.5 schedule over 5x6 any day.

Having entire days off is so much more freedom than having two extra hours in the evening. Three day weekend every weekend means me and my girlfriend could go on little escapes more frequently.

Yeah, as a programmer I often don't program 8 hours a day and when I do it is wildly exhausting. I still absolutely work for 8 hours a day, most days.
Yeah. I had complete loss of smell and taste, which came back about 90% over the next six weeks. It was fine for a month and then it went wonky. Probably 30% of my "scent spectrum" has now been replaced with the same burnt meat smell/taste. Everything from chocolate to feces to hamburgers now has the same core odor.

It really, really sucks.
You're moving the goalposts. The original statement was that just as any car can travel any road, any computer can execute any software. Both statements are incorrect, for different reasons. I get the point of the comment as a whole and I agree wholeheartedly with it, I was simply pointing out a bad analogy and an incorrect assertion.
I don’t have the calculations handy but at one point I was able to figure that the average iPhone user in the US spends (very roughly) $30-$40 per year in the App Store. Even at a 30% cut over the 3-4 year lifespan of the phone it’s not anywhere near $500.

Besides, the hardware itself is already very profitable. The argument that the phone is subsidized by the additional revenue Apple gets is not very good. Apple aren’t entitled to make a certain level of profit. They should have to earn it. Every step of the way.
Excellent replacement for a security guard. If power consumption is low when not in motion, they can patrol, pause for a short time, watch their cameras, then move to a new position. Most aerial drones have to hover to patrol, which would make power consumption dramatically increase.
I can’t possibly imagine why anyone would ever go work at Amazon. How low would your prospects have to sink in order to make someone do that to themselves? I suppose if you’re completely homeless and in danger of starvation. Personally, I’d rather eat the weeds that form on the sidewalk or probably go dumpster diving. That’s much more dignified than working at amazon.

Just imagine the damage you’re doing to your resume. How do you explain having worked at the worst company in the world?
The author gives an example of a little function written in a generic way, and shows how JIT compilation specializes it at runtime into highly optimized machine code. It’s a wonderful example of how Julia’s JIT compiler works, and how it can lead to significant speedups over even C or Fortran code in some cases.
> Animals will catch what they eat and catch no more than necessary

That says a lot about how much you have observed animals so far. Predators have an instinct to kill more than they have a will to eat.
I see the discussion turns out to be general about programming languages. Here is my take:

I am doing Ops (aka DevOps, aka system administration) and I was using bash and Python. I never clicked with Ruby. I was suffering. Constant thought "why is it so shitty?"

Outdated bash doesn't meet any modern expectation from a programming language.

Python, as other general purpose languages, was not created for Ops specifically. Running external process is a pain, data manipulation is with list comprehensions instead of more straightforward map() and filter() (or do non-idiomatic Python), quite a few other features missing which I would expect when writing small scripts.

I think Ops people deserve better. Result - my own programming language - https://github.com/ngs-lang/ngs . Is it "better" language? Probably not. I do think it sucks less than others for Ops though.
Eight quick thoughts on WWDC 2021, and an extended one
So Long Autodesk Shotgun
You also don't know who your boss knows or who you'll run into again. Burning bridges is satisfying but I'm sure I was turned down for at least one job based on the circumstances under which I left. Even though it was all supposed to be confidential.
In that type of company, shit flows downhill - very alpha male chest thumping workplace, lots of cocaine floating around. The IT guy was a buddy of the owner, and was clearly ashamed of the situation but wasn’t about to stick his neck out for the PFY, and I was basically there to run trunk cabling in plenum spaces and get some real world Linux sysadmin experience. Someone’s head had to roll, and it was mine, as it was a very cheap and disposable head to lop off.
> I have never really seen someone with a "medium" amount of leverage in the business. You are either the manager or the managed.

I think having a "medium" amount of leverage is just not usually explicitly signaled. But it's definitely there.

An engineer can know they aren't at any risk of being fired barring a huge screwup, and use that leverage to coast (and if they're remote, that means working fewer hours -> getting paid a higher effective wage.)
Texas Power Companies Are Remotely Raising Temperatures on Smart Thermostats
I dont see a difference between using a mchine and using claws and teeth.

I dont see a difference between mother killing prey for her cubs and butcher doing it for me.

I dont see a difference between farmer raising lambs and lion protecting his territory.

Is efficiency your only qualm? The only difference it makes is amount of life, not it's quality.
>but I know of other teams who would have no issues in taking in a fresh college grad, making them do work for 6-12 months and then just randomly putting them on PIP.

stack ranking came up in another thread a few days ago and this practice of forced attrition seems like just another way to do the same thing.

I thought it was understood that this kind of structure just incentivizes internecine fighting and politics over and above any imagined positive effects.

Mind-boggling that there still exists upper management that thinks otherwise.

I mean, early Amazon must have hired a lot of ex-Microsofties with stack-ranking PTSD, being based in the same area. You would think they would know better.

It seems like the more employees you have under you, the less you see them as human beings instead of inputs and outputs into a Rube Goldbergian machine you are trying to keep running.
I wish we did cap (or even fix?) liability to repair the other’s vehicle.

If I crash into your $1m stained glass car, that should be mostly your problem. The highway is not a place to store your work of art.

If I sensibly drive a $5k used Toyota that’s easily repairable, that should be good for my insurance, not yours in the way of lower liability premia.

Maybe make it like « the car needs a new paint job, here’s your $1k cheque, we don’t care how difficult the manufacturer made it for you to repaint it. If that’s a problem for you, decide better on your next auto purchase. ». But then insurance adjusters would be out of business and half the reason for insurance, having someone else figure out for me what the damages are so I don’t get screwed, has just disappeared.
I imagine the project would be broken into hardware challenges (mechatronics, electronics, and manufacturing) and software (AI, programmability).

Most likely because everything you could need in the software world is free (eg Tensorflow, CUDA, etc). Everything to do with hardware is very expensive (Altium, Proteus, Simulink, any sort of CNC control).
I'm from the Netherlands and its an option that's quite common for companies that have 36 hour work weeks; 1) take Friday afternoon off (or Wednesday if you're children are off from school) 2) have a full day off once every other week, 3) have an extra day off every week but work 9 hours the other four.

Personally 9 hours per day wouldn't work, after a solid day of programming I tend to loose focus too much after about 7 hours, but some of the alternatives work fine.
You'd be surprised how much we thought the world was magic just a few hundred years ago. In 100 years from now people will look down at us like complete ignorants just like we look down at our ancestors.
I'm quite certain that the current scientific understanding is that we don't know how consciousness works at all. This is exactly the kind of landscape where one might expect big surprises.

Think about how useless our intuitions proved to be when it comes to other phenomena like gravity or electromagnetism. It took a while to (kind of) figure these out despite them being easier to measure than consciousness.

W.r.t. fish: they act in a way you'd expect a creature to act if they felt pain. If they had vocal cords and thus the ability to scream, would you agree that they feel pain? Same applies to insects.
> I'm well aware there are some complications with open source licensing, in which many businesses profit off free labor without giving anything back.

How is that a "complication"? That's exactly how it's supposed to work - it's gratis and you may be able to "profit" (benefit) from using it for free.
> they would've told him to take care of the wild pigs problem

Why cant the locals take care of the pigs problems themselves?

Just hunt them or dig a ditch around the farm so that they cant cross it.
So I don't know what sort of reporting requirements Scott's giving has, if any. I am interested to learn this.

Regardless of what sort of reproting requirements she has as the giver, the recipients, especially if 501-c-3's, will still have standard reporting requirements for their tax exempt status, they can't use it in blatantly corrupt ways even if the giver were fine with that.

I think what you are saying is that if there isn't sufficient "due dilligence" (whatever that is) the money might be "mis-used".

There is an alternate question: What percentage of philanthropic money can be used on applying for that money, and documenting and reporting how it was used, before we consider that "mis-use"? 20%? 50%? 75%? There is definitely some number.

Why is the giver more qualified to decide what "mis-use" is than the recipient? If some % of the money is "mis-used", will that be significantly less than the money saved begging for and justifying to philanthropists that the money was used how the philanthropists would prefer?

Again the pull-quote from Scott:

> we believe that teams with experience on the front lines of challenges will know best how to put the money to good use, we encouraged them to spend it however they choose"?

Are you suggesting that's an irresponsible approach?

Again, I don't know what sort of application or reporting requirements Scott has, if any, and I am curious to learn more.

But I am confident that this philosophy will lead to a lot less time spent begging for money and documenting the proof that you used it exactly how you begged for it, and that this will make the money go much further.

What does"due dillegence" mean, are there differnet ways to do it and why is it an "essential element" of philanthropic giving? What are the possible consequences if you don't make recipients spend enough time explaining exactly how they will use the money and documenting they did so? What are the consequences if you make them spend too much time? Who gets to decide the "correct" balance? I don't think it's irresponsible for Scott to decide she shouldn't get to make all the decisions around that just because she is one of the richest people on the planet.
> The language appropriate tool for writing SQL is SQL. Anything else is a mess...

It sounds like you're pretty set on that opinion, and that's fine, but I suspect you just haven't run into the case where the raw SQL is far messier than using a query builder.

SQL strings are pretty inflexible. The big advantage of a query builder (note that I'm not saying "ORM") is that you can start with a simple base case and dynamically mutate the query to add clauses specific to the request you're handling. Maybe one user wants 10 results per page and another user wants 25, for example.

I have an example of how far you can take this at http://btubbs.com/postgres-search-with-facets-and-location-a.... I could not endorse trying to build the query interface in that post with raw SQL.
I like sharing my on again, off again side project, CyFHIR. https://github.com/Optum/CyFHIR
In healthcare there are a set of open standards for data, messaging, integrating, etc called FHIR. I recognized the unstructured nature of those data standards as graph-like and made this Neo4j plugin for handling FHIR data at the db level. You can import FHIR data directly with optional structural validation and export that data back to json. A graph of the data lets you analyze connections between resources and you can do things like patient similarities on medical histories using graph data science.
How old are you? Were you completely healthy before?
That person is no David Hilbert.

As multiple comments says, many of the problems he talks about are already solved. And some of them were solved in the past and solutions abandoned.

If you want to learn something, you will be much better off starting from a post which does not ignore existing state of the field.
OP's point is in that situation the government should/would have data gathered from onboard sensors about the UFOs. A fighter jet costs hundreds of millions of dollars, so we'd expect there to be various sensors with recordings of these objects, rather than just pilot's eyesight and memory.
Having your work email on your phone shouldn't matter. Altstore uses the Mac's mail app to resign your apps when it's time to. Wouldn't recommend installing the server on your work computer, though.

Apps on your phone are still fully sandboxed.
I completely agree that it’s a matter of trust – I really like that observation.

At my current company I find the people I work with to be exceptionally good at support and mentoring, and it’s a real luxury. I can comfortably admit I’m rusty on some math or find certain tasks in Rust challenging, and I’m just met with support and encouragement. We might hit a whiteboard or share strategies to solve types of problems, and there’s no moment of wondering why I’m not already proficient.

Even if I struggle with a problem in my area of focus, where I’m expected to know the most, they never treat me like I should know better or like they’re somehow disappointed.

So while I hope I contribute to that culture of support and mentoring, I can’t help but point out that my team makes it effortless and I’m very fortunate for that. Like you mentioned, it really is rare.
Please don’t use assert for validation [1]. Just explicitly raise an exception instead, as Python can strip asserts and an AssertionError is a crap thing to have to catch.

In Python you almost never have to do “for i in range(len(…))”, just do “for path in file_path” [2].

1. https://github.com/yazeed44/gjf/blob/b85f4e58fe6ed84b5d2f813...

2. https://github.com/yazeed44/gjf/blob/b85f4e58fe6ed84b5d2f813...
I believe fighter pilots (maybe all pilots?) are required to have very good eyesight as well.
Unlikely. There might be a drop in demand for the breeds used for home defense or herding, but most breeds are recreational and people enjoy the company of other living, breathing things.
They background music makes it hard to know the noise it really makes.
'There can be only one.'
Wow, this works seriously good at some level then.
The first is already there in the form of a strong etag. Http conditional requests with if-range support etag validation but that is a document checksum not a chunk checksum.
Once you have sufficiently advanced robots, doesn’t the cost of most goods dramatically reduce since the labor is taken out of the entire supply chain?
Totally. I've got a friend who's been working on his own mobile app for years. Every time I speak to him he tells me how he's rewriting the backend, or exploring some new language. I just keep telling him it doesn't matter to end users (unless it makes him more productive), but the penny doesn't seem to drop.

Talk to business people about their business and you'll be talking their language. The technology is just a tool. Your job is to use the right tech to keep costs down, while keeping agility and reliability up. Do this and you'll have more leverage compared to the competition.