skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Ok but is there a large portion of the population that believes blind people don't deserve health care for their disability?

Actually, health insurance doesn't cover the cost of a guide dog, which can cost between $40-60k [0]

From personal experience (I'm not blind, but I know one), there is also workforce discrimination in the form of "don't ask her to do that, she's blind" when in fact the blindness doesn't impact the work at all.

>I don't think you would be sitting here going "only .5% of the US has type 1 diabetes, why are talking so much about making sure they get appropriate health care?

I know a diabetic who says he is COMPLETLY dependent on his work's health care to pay for his medicine. I'm not certain we are giving ENOUGH attention to this.
[0] https://puppyintraining.com/how-much-does-a-guide-dog-cost/#....
This makes me wonder if he was a source of inspiration for the movies...
That sounds extremely feasible to me. One of the companies i used to work for will definitely have a bunch of their training videos lost this way, and it's totally reasonable to believe that a new hire for the warehouse would not bother telling anyone that the video wouldn't play. I don't know that any real injury will result from this, but i wouldn't call the scenario absurd
Aside from this article referencing the infamous Office AC Is Sexist article. Have these sweaty workers never heard of a fan?

Your body has a cooling mechanism, and the fact the sweat is pooling on your face arms and legs is due to you not passing enough air over them. Point a fan directly at yourself, wear loose clothing, and you’ll find yourself cooler and drier than you ever thought you could be. ( unless you are one of those poor souls who live in areas with high humidity as well as heat, not much you can do there)
How much of our civilization is focused on essentials like AC though? And how much is wasted on nonsense like Funko Pops and air fryers?
Indirect answer, checkout lowendbox[0] for information and reviews on cheap hosting and VPS.

[0]: https://lowendbox.com/
Of course. But we're dealing with ideology here, and ideologues rarely perform the sort of calculations you have in mind.
That's not what equality is.

One of them wants the same privilege (grapes), but neither animal has rights (or property), so equality is out of the question too.
> A consequence of HOT in relation to programs is that you can compare programs for equality without running them. I rediscovered this a few years ago. It means that e.g. certain physical simulations could be known to not complete without running them to assumed termination. Currently we are wasting millions of dollars running simulations that we could show will not produce valid results.

I'm curious where you got this idea. Even if you express programs in HoTT so that equality of these programs corresponds to (say) identical outputs, there's no reason that this equality should be decidable any more than it is in ordinary mathematics.

You might be confused by the fact that HoTT is (by default) constructive, but just because you can define something in HoTT does not mean that its equality is decidable. In fact, that's a defining property of constructivity in this context: if every type has decidable equality, then the law of excluded middle holds. The proof isn't too hard: simply apply the decidability of equality to the type of propositions and for a given proposition P, check if P = True is true or false.

> systems where you do not accept the axiom of choice or, more interestingly, disregard it entirely.

I'm wondering what the difference between those two is. "not accept" and "disregard" are synonyms to me, but maybe you have something more precise in mind. There's a distinction between not accepting an axiom (so that you're agnostic on the question of whether it holds) and accepting its negation. Maybe that's what you're thinking of.

> it means real numbers "do not exist" as you can not write them down.

In light of your other comment, I'd phrase this as "there are particular real numbers that don't exist" or "some real numbers don't exist". As written, it reads as if the set of real numbers doesn't exist.

Even so, keep in mind the difference between not being able to prove something and being able to prove its negation. HoTT is consistent with adding in more axioms (as you alluded to above) which do imply that Chaitin's constant exists. So that means that the base theory can't prove that such constants don't exist (unless the base theory is inconsistent).
I would be interested in knowing what other sequences were deleted and how common it is to delete from this DB.
Among others. Corrupt government officials in all countries, car insurance agencies, certainly Chinese billionaires and billionaires of almost all countries, the US Democratic Party, even.
> Stonewall UK, a prominent trans rights organization

Yeah, we read the article -- where it was portrayed as over-zealous and at least somewhat discredited.
I'd really like to know the ratio of upvotes to downvote as one possible metric of positive conversation.
It's with HostUS. I got a coupon a few years ago (via LowEndBox), and it's been renewing at the same rate ever since. I have no complaints about them, but I'm not sure you can get the same pricing today.
That's not why people think the virus was made in a lab. The reason people think it was man-made have to do with strangely well-adapted protein sequences found on the virus with no known natural ancestors. Virus evolution requires hosts and time. The nearest common ancestor to this virus is not a good candidate for SARS-COV2 and there are no known intermediate ancestors in the thousands of animals tested.
I don't think it's as simple of a question as you suggest.

Think of a food you disapprove of. Ok, now if you're stranded on a desert island, do you approve of it now? If you're at your usual grocery store you might disapprove of certain foods, but if you have to go to a much smaller one you may switch some of those to approve.
The study they cited included both gender non conforming and gender dysphoric children. Non conforming doesn't mean trans.
My point was that the claim was of limited relevance in context, not that it was false.
I believe you are stating that Score0to2 one-sided strategy should measure worse than plurality one-sided strategy. I don't think this is an obvious claim. It seems to depend on the underlying distribution of candidate quality (especially correlations of preferences).

I don't know what is up with 1-sided score vs 1-sided approval. That is an interesting observation you made and does look suspicious; we should expect the distortion of power to be greater than the loss of honest expressiveness.

When I looked at this project a year ago, I found other strange behaviors that led me to ignore its results, similar to how you are comparing its graphs to your intuition. There is no "correct" model in voting theory. Models are neither good or bad, only to the author's taste or not. For example, with voters on a single dimension, should utility of a candidate be the squared distance, or the absolute distance? How should a candidate's positions be distributed, is n-dimensional Euclidean space good? Should some candidates be straight-up better than others, and what should the distribution be? How should voters be clustered, if at all? What does "strategic" voting mean in each context? What does "honest" voting mean in cardinal contexts?

The author's discussion of methodology was lacking, and the missing priors make its results partially meaningless. I also had no success looking through the code for even basic behavior, because it was too hard to navigate. However, this is only a graduate project, and most graduate projects (including mine) are of lower quality than this one, so I wasn't upset.

In score systems, voters can sometimes be made honest to an extent. For example, on a book rating site, you probably don't rate all books 0 or 5; you use the full scale. Your ratings have greater self-value than your desire to tip the global score. While your assertion is reasonable that it is not the expected "honest" voting behavior, it is also a behavior worth looking at. This goes back to discussion of methodology; all these assumptions need to be documented, rather than buried in hard-to-read code.
New tissue engineering process brings laboratory-grown organs one step closer
Sure - but some flavor of this objection can be made about most technological advances. The harms will be identified and if the people maintain some level of accountability over the system and society, we will adapt to ameliorate those harms.
> Being left wing is not, and never has been, about shutting down conversation, de-platforming, dogma, chilling effects.

>>These are the things of the hard right

Woah. Hey now. People can change.
John McAfee found dead in prison after Spanish extradition ruling
Acting in the sense of as a devil's advocate here, but this guy went and rooted around a data repository for stuff that wasn't his... there was a case a few years ago of a guy who scripted the AT&T site to download similarly accessible data [0] and got 4 years jail for it. We can trot out the well-known Swartz story [1] here as well.

Though I'm happy to have the information available in this particular case, I can't really say this is different in terms of either the letter or spirit of the law.

So: when should we expect to hear this guy being charged with CFAA violation? I'm not holding my breath, and I hope he doesn't, but what he did seems as clear a violation of the law as the two examples listed here.

[0] https://www.wired.com/2013/03/att-hacker-gets-3-years/
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Swartz
I've certainly downvoted comments that I might have agreed with but were made in a bad way more likely to inflame then lead to productive conversation-- trollish or insulting comments.
Author here - well said, I shared your comment below. In situations like what you describe, cultural narratives and inspirational stories matter... swinging to far toward the myth of the lone genius might have negative effects, at least on the margins
Distraction is exactly what’s important about it. It triggers everyone and keeps people from paying attention to other things. Also helps get clicks, sell ads, and boost social media engagement.

Personally I don’t care at all if people want to be trans and be called by a chosen gender pronoun. I just can’t think of a reason I should have a problem with that.

There are a few edge case areas like women’s sports and prisons where it is a very complicated issue, but those are rare cases among rare cases. This is not an issue that should be monopolizing headlines.
> fairness (should male born people get female scholarships, compete in women's sports?). A FtM is not hurting anything or taking any opportunities away from anyone really

fairness is an issue when considering MtF, but not FtM? why exactly?
Author here - great quote, this is very close to the spirit of my argument.
What's the big deal? Just install our App. It's soooo much better in all the data we can take from you, er provide you.
Those two statements are not necessarily correlated. The worse your neighbour countries are, the more eager people are to immigrate to any nearby country that is less bad. The US is definitely more desirable than Mexico. But that doesn’t prove that the US is more decidable than other non-developing countries. I was offered a green card and 6 digit salary to move to the US. I chose to move to Australia instead. That was a great move.
Social security is not a personal slush fund. It is a social program.

What you're describing would be an anti-social program.
Holy crap that looks FANTASTIC!
So now you’ve gone from a claim for a few thousand to something where it’s going to cost you tens of thousands up front for court time _plus_ you have a chance of the judgement going against you despite the “permission” and now you’re on the hook for the original few thousand, _possibly_ the attorney fees of the troll, and _possibly_ some punitive judgement on top of it because you fought the “reasonable offer”.

My wife has published some books. We have a contract _licence_ written out for the art we _bought_ the use of for the book covers. The licence wouldn’t be a perfect defence if something happened like this, but it is something stronger than an email permission.
GoFundHer – Connect with Sponsors Worldwide
That is what some people say about comments on some orange site I frequent :) Any specifics though?
Ask HN: Notion is withholding my company data, what can I do?
I've been a paying customer from https://www.notion.so/ since 2017 with my company. In the early days, I even exchanged emails with the founders giving detailed feedback.

Around 3 months ago, I started having issues with their "Export" feature. Basically, you request to export all your data on Notion, and you're supposed to receive a link to download it. But the link never arrives.

I contacted them about this, and that's what they said at the time:

> Our engineering team is currently working through a large backlog, and there is no immediate fix for this issue...

I explained this wasn't a "nice to have" feature. It was a critical function that locks us with them and goes against their selling message of "you own your data".
I was ignored, with the same robotic tone.

So today, 3 months later, I contacted them again to say I'm having the same issue. They replied with the same message:

> Please accept my sincere apologies for the ongoing difficulties with this. Our engineering team is currently working through a large backlog, and there is no immediate fix for this issue. I’ve already alerted them to the issue and told them of your particular situation, and we’ll certainly follow up if there are any developments! Really appreciate your patience with us as we continue to improve. Please let me know if there’s anything else I can help with in the meantime.

I'm again explaining the same thing - If the feature isn't working, this is a critical function that they should at least try to generate manually as per my request.

They are basically locking me in. They, again, replied with scripted messages:

> Unfortunately, our engineering team is working through quite a backlog at the moment, and there isn't an immediate fix for this issue....

Any suggestions on what I can do? Thanks!
Impossible. Your request is a distraction and is deceptive - at best - because medicine doesn't work that way - and it never has. There's always the risk of long-term and short-term side-effects when any medication or treatment is given to treat any condition; the question is one of the benefits outweighing the risks. Accepting responsibility for the outcomes of these decisions is what lies at the heart of practising medicine.

Frankly, transgender youth who seek these treatments generally suffer from clinical mental health disorders - including anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation. These carry a significant risk of long-term suffering and anguish - not to mention the obvious fact that suicide is far too common in this population.

The risks of treatment are well studied and well known - the drugs used have existed for decades. They absolutely do not have to be completely safe and free of long term side effects - and even then the risk present is incredibly low - if what it does is keep them from committing suicide because of the suffering they endure as their bodies slowly turn into what they don't want to be. Surely you can imagine the distress that would cause?

The studies and metastudies and International Endocrine Society metareviews and treatment protocol recommendations are there and the vast majority of them say that you do less harm by providing blockers than you do by withholding them - do your own googling.
Getting someone's pronoun wrong by accident happens. And it's generally just an "oh sorry, I'll try to get that right next time" and you move on. The problematic people are the ones who make a deliberate point of not using the pronouns that someone would like them to use, because they've independently decided that those pronouns are wrong.
I think this raises a few questions.

Has anything changed in the last 10 or 20 years?

Why does this affect as many youths as it does today?

No doubt there was unhappiness with one's identity in the past, but I doubt it was at the level it is today. And, in addition, I doubt it's at the same elevated level in all countries. In other words, we can ask 30 or 40 year olds, did you as a kid feel unhappy with your identity as much as today's youth feel about their identities but couldn't wouldn't express it?

Is it kids leading the change, is it kids following societal trends, is it other, what is it?
This comment gets a lot wrong and I don't think it's a productive use of my time to explain it fully but I will try to enumerate my main objections.

1. "Intact" is straight-up offensive. I was trying to explain why without saying so (because people on here always seem to object that something isn't offensive when I say it is) but you didn't get it, or I did a poor job of explaining. The term implies that trans women with vaginas merely have damaged penises, and made a choice to ruin their bodies, and consequently that cisgender bodies are better, because they are always intact. That is where it originates from.

2. Many human societies throughout history up to today have recognized at least three genders, most famously for the US, indigenous Americans with two-spirit people. It is incidental, not inherent, that Western culture does not have a category like this outside of scientific classification.

3. Feminists ostensibly believe in equality between men and women. This idea that men are uncontrollable rapists, and that women are defenseless and purely innocent, seems blatantly sexist to me. Sure, men are especially violent in our society. It's plainly true. They also happen to hold most of the power in our society. The concept of rape culture goes a long way to explaining why men rape people and are generally more violent: it is condoned by the people who hold most of the power. Justice for trans people is inseparable from justice for all women, and the destruction of patriarchy. That's what I was trying to get at in talking about the obvious violence in the US prison system. The state treating people with violence legitimizes people treating each other with violence, and that's only the start. Humans are highly intelligent and by all accounts we have, through great effort, managed to become much less violent in our dealings with each other over time, for the most part. At some point you can't blame animal instinct for choices that humans make.
Our resident olfaction researcher says otherwise: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27608745.
Considering Mr MacAfee lifestyle and unusual... fetiches... he died older than I expected.
Generational wealth is way overstated. Steve jobs didn’t have generational wealth. Airbnb was funded by selling obama branded cereal.
> It also strikes me as quite perverse to blame people who are able to move their children out of schools that have become terrible (through no fault of their own).

People not being involved is a big way schools become terrible.

If the people who would push for quality can simply opt out instead, what's left? If the people who know what it takes to succeed abandon the system, who left is supposed to even know what is required to make the public system succeed? Any loss of funding pales in comparison to lost passion and expertise.

Most public services that the well-off don't have to use are going to suck, because the only victims are by definition the ones without much power to make change!
There was a very long time when YouTube bled absolutely incredible amounts of money.
>In Australia and most other developed countries now, this ideology is heavily promoted to children, encouraging them to believe they are trans.

Proof? As an Australian with multiple family members in the education industry, I've never heard of this.
Let’s Prove Leftpad (Comparing proof tools)
Show HN: Optics for F#
"Cryptocurrency is a fractal set of scams all the way down."

I really like that description. Did you come up with that?
Human Genetic Variation
> I do ML every day.

> I go to the github. Maybe model download link is there. I see zero code

Paper was released today. Chill. They said they will release the code in September (I'm guessing late September). The paper is also a pre-print. They're probably aiming for CVPR and don't want to get scooped.

> Model first. Code second. Paper third.

That's how you produce ML code and documentation but that is not how you release it. I guarantee you that they are still tuning and making the model better. They're were still updating ADA till pretty recently (last commit on the pytorch version is 4 months ago, to code).

I originally wasn't in CS, and when I first came over I wasn't in ML. We never had code. The fact that ML publishes models AND checkpoints is a godsend. I love it. Makes work so much easier and helps the community advance faster. I love this, but just chill. The paper isn't peer-reviewed. It is a pre-print. They're showing people what they've done in the last 6 months. It's part publicity stunt, part flex, part staking claim, but it is also part sharing with the community. Even without the code we learn a lot because they attached a paper to it. So chill.
Logically, the two constructions have different meanings. The first is equivalent to "nothing needs", so it excludes the possibility of some but not all things needing, while the second includes that possibility.

However, some people use the first incorrectly when they really mean the second. This happens often enough that you could argue the incorrect usage has now become idiomatic as well.
The Science of DeepSpec (Proving Networking Correct)
Republicans think it's a wedge issue, so they're happy to distract from real issues and ruin trans people's lives.
Thirty years ago, you might drive around an unfamiliar city with a friend offering directions as you go. Twenty years ago, you woukd print off turn by turn Mapquest directions and check them occasionally at a stop light. Now, you can have turn by turn directions piped into your ear without any other human assistance, allowing you to do the task at hand easier, safer and more quickly. Don’t be distracted by the challenges of the visual HUD, this is absolutely our AR present: overlaying digital tools and information onto our lived experience to make ourselves happier, smarter, more effective, etc.
I’d like to see best comments within a page. I’d like to sort by controversial too. That’s where the action happens.
online interaction back then was kind of a big no no. Nintendo took a long time to implement it.

Anything targeted towards children was basically not a good candidate for online collaboration because of the fear of predators.

I think we have a good model now of how to do it correctly and what sort of safe guards are expected in the software to protect end users so it's less of an issue now.

Minecraft also did a good job of separating public/private server (or at least it did back in the day).
Which is as much as you offered.

It wouldn't be easy to prove something like that, because you're claiming the causation is inverted. You can't very well construct a controlled study out of people's social connections or gender identity.

I don't think either of us can do more than an educated guess here.
Because the military becomes the favored career path, and then ends up controlling politics to keep itself well funded.
Who says germans don't have a sense of humor (OK my austrian friends do, but you know those austrians...)
I am not a heavy user - so not much screen time - and my phone spends 8 hours a work day in flight mode which surely helps. I charge my phone once every 6-7 days.

I know the articles phones are not mainstream. I would like a mobile OS OS :-P and as a light user I am willing to make a few concessions.

But this isn't even in the same league.