skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So I take it that you agree that transportation dwarfs agriculture?

As far as Foreign imports of consumer goods accounting for a huge chunk of our carbon, that claim has never held up when I investigated it. In particular, Our World in Data had some fantastic plots showing that, though I don't have time to locate them at the moment.

Could I turn the tables on you and ask for some substantiation of the claim that import of consumer goods is a major source of emissions attributable in the US? Because the amount of carbon that goes into making a computer seems pretty trivial compared to that of making a car, and from burning a gallon+ a day.

Also, for evidence of the inherent sustainability of urban areas over suburban areas, check out these maps:

https://coolclimate.berkeley.edu/maps

I forget if they account for carbon from imported goods or not, but it's a consumption based inventory, rather than the typical production based inventory.
This is most likely a problem with this specific smart contract, from what I understand, if the EVM on the "winning" miner were to produce a state transition that did not faithfully follow the SC, that block should be rejected.

Polygon is a little different, due to its proof of stake system, where there is no "winner" and the validators (Heimdall instances) "check" the work of the actual block producers (Bor instances). It also has a slasher-like element where only one Heimdall instance needs to prove that a block is incorrectly executed for it to be rejected, so a malicious actor would need to compromise all active Heimdall instances to be able to lie.
And a automatic metrics based firing system is probably much fairer than a human. Hard to sue for discrimination when you can prove with code it was based on metrics.
What a lot of people don't understand is that speech has a legal definition that is especially relevant in cases of libel or incitement. Once it can be considered speech, the content of that speech in public areas is allowed to vary under the first amendment in the US.

It's not splitting hairs, because this is routinely debated in courts all over the country. As for whether or not people having the ability to speak freely leads to a loss of rights, the US has been around for some time now and is pretty quickly gaining rights for people in the grand scheme of things. The suppression of speech has not fared the same, and both sides of the aisle can (hypocritically) point to suppression of speech leading to a loss or possible loss of rights. If we want to talk about speech and history, it's much easier to find examples of control that goes too far, and often a lot more quickly.
I have read (no proof but it was on a tech forum and seemed simple enough to be real) that Intel will refund at least some customers (The wording wasn't clear whether it was someone who bought a CPU or bought a HPC cluster...) if the CPU was sold to you as having a feature and its then disabled and you can show to them you used it.
"You can have concurrent tasks but with dependencies between them which means there is no parallelism available." - that isn't really concurrent then, is it? Concurrency implies running two things concurrently; you're just creating things to wait. No useful work is being done. You broke a sequential task across processes. Just because those processes are stuck on a receive loop doesn't mean they're doing anything. Might as well say your Java program is concurrent because you spun up a second thread that just waits.

That was what I was getting at with my question; arbitrary processes that do their work in a serial fashion...isn't a concurrent program. It's a badly written serial one.
You can choose to not answer (not always, but sometimes).
You can absolutely walk away and abandon your condo in that case.
FTA: “And then they found some video from eight years ago, that they flagged, took that down, and that was our third strike,” he explained. “And they took down our entire account.”

That is not like the take down algorithm is being triggered by something you just posted, that sounds just like someone deciding to look in your garbage bins to find anything to be used against you. It stinks a lot, and I don't mean the garbage.

" ... the deletion of the site’s channel erases a deep, years-long archive of video clips—effectively eliminating a resource for understanding and exposing right-wing extremism."

Well, that one is 100% their fault. Never, ever, ever, rely on any other service for keeping data other than your own backups. Especially when the party involved in keeping your data is also the same one who can wipe it from existence if anyone with deep enough pockets or connections says so.
There’s a difference between unpredictable and unbiased that you seem to be skipping past here.
> that isn't really concurrent then

It is, using standard industry terminology.

Concurrency does not require that concurrent tasks are able to make independent progress at the same time, just that they are in some point of progress at the same time.

Back in 2012 when I was working on my PhD I wrote a paper about an example algorithm with very little inherent parallelism, where even if you have multiple concurrent tasks all making forward progress you may find it extremely hard to actually produce results in parallel, if you want to do a deep dive into this problem.

https://chrisseaton.com/multiprog2012/seaton-multiprog2012.p...

I wrote a poster about it as well for an easier introduction.

https://chrisseaton.com/research-symposium-2012/seaton-irreg...
Yeah, I dont believe this. Maybe "favor those with the stomach for deep, solitary work, who can also easily context switch to meetings where they use their natural sales and political skills to get buy-in for what they are doing". There may be some rare environments where good deep workers are well supported by management and have someone else to interpret and "sell" what they've done, but it's a rarity. Even the best work needs to be well communicated, positioned within the context of what the org is doing, etc, which always favors collaboration and social skills
Doğum Kontrol Hapları Hakkında Soru Ve Cevaplar
S o why does NYT imply that it has not? I can’t see WSJ source so any insight?

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/27/business/economy/jobs-wor...
Engineering can indeed be useful to increase re- and upcycling in the future.

But given that recycling rate is at the moment for most materials miniscule, and our economic system can only work with global exponential growth, it alone can't be the solution – it's only valuable combined with also stopping growth in rich countries.
Yes: fresh vs convenient.

Once you can tell a baker's bread is stale, you can also tell when that bread is fresh.

Yes: stale bread and stale flour tortillas can be rescued somewhat by re-heating, but stale corn tortillas seem to need a bigger transformation: fried into chips, cooked in beans...
And did meeting them shift their position on an issue where the opposition is a massively powerful and wealthy industry that spends millions on lobbying efforts?
There is more than one "law." Each fiat ecosystem is its own system of financial law, each mutually-incompatible with any other fiat ecosystem. Cryptocurrency gives an alternative arbitrator that allows for these mutually-incompatible systems of law to be bridged.

Also, to be clear, in the example I mentioned, the government of the US does not forbid trading with Nigeria/Liberia/etc. Traditional money-transfer services (Paypal, Western Union, most savings banks, etc.) are just unwilling to do it, because of the frequency of those transactions being scams. But this prevents people who "know what they're doing" (like people employing people in those countries!) from having any means to send money there.

This is a gap in the market, in some sense, but it's one that couldn't really be filled by any other fiat "retail" solution, as that solution would then be what scammers use to bilk people. So you really need something that's "complex and finance-nerdy" in the way that crypto is, to ensure that it's hard enough for regular people to use it to transfer money, that scammers just don't bother to try talking people through it. (Such a product would then never find product-market fit, as it would have no retail customers. Only a system run "for its own sake", like cryptocurrency systems are, can really be a good base platform to enable such transfers over the long term.)
Deleting those comments doesn't help the comment poster (or others) know why Technique B is dangerous, or inoculate them from hearing about Technique B later and using it without knowing the danger.

We shouldn't pretend poisons don't exist, we should label them with warnings.
Incredibly bad blog post in my eyes to clear up the confusion about the system requirements, especially the Intel 8th gen & zen+ and newer requirement.

>As we release to Windows Insiders and partner with our OEMs, we will test to identify devices running on Intel 7th generation and AMD Zen 1 that may meet our principles.

At least they left the door open to just end up opening it up for those CPUs anyways, because it seems like there was no real reason for that requirement. Probably realized that they still sell hardware that doesn't meet the requirement.

What a communication nightmare.

Edit:
You can't make this up. According to multiple comments in a reddit thread [1], including quotes there, this same blog post here included a claim first that 6th gen & AMD pre-zen will never be supported. This was removed.

No idea what Microsoft is doing there.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows11/comments/o9oqha/update_on...
That's a large part of the reason I posted it. The situations are not exactly parallel though. Derek's blog is his space, and he absolutely has a right to curate it as he wishes, though in the past a laissez-faire approach has worked.

I found this interesting for a few other reasons as well. It's a pretty solid data point that discourse around Covid is worse than around other scientific topics. Also, there are suggestions that a small number of people are purposefully stirring up shit (the fact that they didn't take hints that their mode of discourse was not welcome). I'm sure the same dynamic is at play on HN as well.

Ultimately, we have to come up with strategies to deal with this. I'm hopeful that Derek's approach will work for his small (but excellent) corner of the Internet.
> Now let us assume that condo is worth less than $100k. I don’t think you can just walk away and abandon your condo.

You can if you go bankrupt. It's not like condo ownership is non-dischargeable in the same sense that, say, Superfund site ownership is.
This is how I feel about most categorizations. I did some research the other night about problems with categorization, but surprisingly couldn't find much.

While categorization is good for quick communication, it usually abstracts too much. Rather than category, we should see things as types? Maybe this is one in the same?
China's current rover is what the US put on Mars, twice, 16 years ago (Those rovers ran for 6 and 12 years).

The US is currently putting nuclear powered rovers on Mars. That is why there is no huge US media coverage of this story in the US.
I've rarely encounter bugs in Anki. The ones i have encountered have been the result of me hacking on it in some way. Sure it's hard to use and pretty clunky, but i wouldn't call it buggy.
> I hope we understand that influencing others can happen without meeting them in a room on their schedule

OK, but this marginally favors introverts, if at all.

People will still need to be aggressive in building relationships and influencing them. Does this sound to you like something introverts would enjoy, even if they're able to do it on Zoom?
If you steal my credit card and buy things with it, I will call my bank and I won't need to pay for it when I settle my statement balance at the end of the month. The bank will follow up with the merchant and/or law enforcement and, in most cases, the bank will get its money back somehow. In the cases where it doesn't, I'm sure the bank is insured against losses. Banks and insurance companies probably have a complicated model for estimating $X/yr in theft.

If someone steals my wallet's private key (= stealing my credit card), I'm done. There is no recourse AFAIK.
That quote does not say to drink disinfectant... implying that it does is disingenuous at best. Even the far left PolitiFact admits that!
The difference with the old insulin vs. the analogs is that with the old ones it's really easy to lose a toe, leg, kidney or get blind. With the new analogs it's possible to control your glucose levels so that you can stay healthy and get old.

Source: a T1 diabetic, used all possible insulins in my life. Very happy in Europe.
Steven Sinofsky (former President of Microsoft’s Windows Division) shares some behind the scenes stories about Microsoft and the internet on his blog:

https://hardcoresoftware.learningbyshipping.com/p/026-blue-s...

https://hardcoresoftware.learningbyshipping.com/p/029-tellin...
Tezos – A blockchain designed to be upgraded
/r/bogelheads
Note on typography: I know this is very common in the US, but I just cannot get used to em-dashes without spaces around them. I tried for ~30secs to figure out what "circling-or" and "cyciling-the" might be, until I realized that those dashes are meant to separate, not join. IMHO "circling - or cycling - the tack" is much easier to read.
Nice to see you here as well. Solid work on that moderation; that community is huge and while often great, in some ways pretty darned awful.
ELI5: will they have to keep the entire 380km or so of track cooled to 4.15k continuously? This feels like a shockingly difficult engineering problem.
I am arguing that there are no marginal projects at current profit levels, and that's why they can spend billions on stock buybacks. There is a point that lessening patent protections would cause companies to cut back, but we are not at that point.
Chauvin should not have kept his knee on the back of Floyd's neck for so long, but there is no gentle way to restrain someone who is resisting arrest. There is much criticism of police, but less policing has resulted in a much higher murder rate in 2020 and 2021 than in prior years.
Wait, so BitCoin's benefit now is that it's too hard to use? lol

edit: And that's why it can't be used for scams! Oh my. I'm not sure what universe you live in, but it's different from mine.
It might be tiring but it is also important.

Believe or not, whatever we (people, collectively) decide to allow or disallow is very likely going to profoundly affect shape of freedom of expression for future generations.
I dunno, it's not about wealth concentration, be rich, that's fine. It's about whether your wealth was gathered by contributing useful work, or by parasitizing it.

I imagine a proof of work system where there's a community work queue, and "mining" is completing tasks in the queue, borderlands-style (though hopefully without the violence). The mined tokens can be resolved to nft's which stay attached to the wallet of the user who requested that the work be done.

There's also a web of trust and a UBI component (Circles-UBI style) to disinventivise sybil accounts.

If the work-originator deems the work unsatisfactory, they can invalidate the tokens that were mined from its "completion" and recoup a fraction of what they paid to have it done.

So doing business with somebody who has a reputation of doing shoddy work, or of failing to respect good work, is risky because your tokens might evaporate.

An would-be investor in this token would have to decide whose tokens to buy, which requires much more research.

You could also have some system to disinventivise hoarding, like a token half-life.

Or you know, something like that.
I have countless times inspected packets on the wire when writing web applications, and there is tons we do to ensure service behaviour aligns with the networking stack.

I have also inspected traffic when investigating/writing patches for server code or the kernel, but that’s a completely separate matter.

What’s more, most nontrivial application code causes additional network activity, from DNS queries to database connections, calls to external APIs et cetera. The all-the-world-is-HTTP fallacy is how wheels get reinvented, but badly, as with websockets or JWTs.
Please, someone help me understand. Why would I want this instead of ENS or a traditional domain?

Let's assume that we are interested in decentralization for the sake of censorship-resistance and lets imagine I want to run a website to allow people to share "extreme" political opinions that might not otherwise be normally tolerated on the clearnet web. I set it up with IPFS, and then I register:

1. a traditional domain name

2. ENS (Ethereum Name Service) domain

3. a Tor Onion Hidden v3 Service

4. IPDS "IPFS Subdomain"

After attracting attention of the FBI, the traditional domain gets redirected to an FBI seizure page, presumably.

The ENS domain is governed by a contract that would require a manual M-of-N override of the ENS contract. (I'd love to see a threat analysis of ENS from this angle). I've never heard of this happening and it seems like it would be a very notable event.

The hidden service is, short of attacks on Tor, quite resistant (though usability is quite poor).

And then finally, this submission, IPDS -- I'm not sure I believe that they will be any better than a traditional domain (given the warning at the bottom, and on the interest form).

Can someone help me understand? EDIT: The more I look at this, the more I'm struck by just another sign of how immature the IPFS ecosystem is. Seemingly destined to NIH every last thing. How can you put this landing page up without any other details or acknowledgement of alternatives and expect buy-in?

EDIT2: of course they're collaborating in a cleartext Telegram room. People, get your stuff together, open source collaboration belongs on Matrix. Not Discord. Not Telegram. Period.
"Think smaller. More legs."
The Joy of Cybersex (1993)
It shows up in glibc a couple of times around pthreads, if you search around for "elision", "RTM", "HLE", etc.
I think it depends on the definition of that "deep solitary work". Writing a report for an hour or so can feel like extremely deep and extremely solitary, even though it's just a trivial report.
It appears to be the former:

"The number of individuals who received unemployment benefits decline[d] by 13.8% by the week ending June 12, compared to mid-May, in states where governors explicitly said that enhanced benefits would end in June, based on an analysis by Jefferies LLC economists."

and:

"In May, the Missouri's unemployment rate was 4.2%, below the national average of 5.8%, according to data from the Department of Labor.

Missouri ended enhanced federal benefits for unemployed state residents as of June 12, making it one of the first states to take the action."
Is there one for all the scam ICOs from 2017/2018? I'm ashamed to admit I fell for one called KYC and one called Crc, which was supposedly supported by Crytek or something. It was just a hundred bucks, but I've always wondered what happened to that one given that it had a well known brand tacked on.
And when you find someone disagreeable, just give them the old "You're posting too fast, please slow down."
> I believe there is a 2-D dimensional binary. Simply using a grid (with an array of cells forming a line, and lines stacked on top of each other—a spreadsheet basically), we can drop all syntax characters. The only thing you have is your cells and your semantic words.

I fail to see how this helps.

The reason why bugs crop up all the time in software isn't because syntax is confusing. It's also not because semantics is confusing--plenty of bugs have perfectly clear, well-understood bugs. The problem is that we as programmers don't think about how our software could fail. We don't ask ourselves "could this multiplication overflow?" frequently enough. We don't look at code and ask "who made sure this pointer points to valid data?" We believe that there's no way the price of an affiliated token could ever reach exactly $0, so we assert that it can't happen.

The way you avoid these bugs is to just simply make it impossible for the system to get into certain states. It's already the case with statically-typed languages that it's impossible to pass a string to a function that expected an int. If you design your API right, you can make it impossible to get an index into an array that is out-of-range (although this is way too rarely done). But, even then, you will still find people who will confidently use the escape hatch to say "this string is clearly UTF-8, I know it is from outside experience, so don't bother checking."
Upgrade to fiat currency that the rest of the world runs on and doesn't have these problems?
Wikipedia has the case and pictures: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput...
Whilst this may well be true, the very same problem affects COVID death numbers: a death is reported as a COVID death if it occurs within about a month of a positive test result, regardless of whether symptoms are displayed at all or whether the person is already dying of something else. Thus using the same standard to classify vaccine-correlated deaths ensures at least that the numbers are comparable in this regard. You can see where this affects their results where they calculate a CFR using the globally reported death rates.

If they had used some other way to define a vaccine-related death, it would make the vaccines look artificially good, because you'd be comparing it against something made to look more deadly than it really is.

There is an additional problem with your counter-argument: it is anticipated and is discussed in the paper, which appears to counter it:

"One might argue that it is always difficult to ascertain causality in such reports. This is certainly true; however, the Dutch data, especially the fatal cases, were certified by medical specialists"

They also discuss your second point:

"In the Israeli field study, the observation period was six weeks, and in the U.S. regulatory studies between four to six weeks, a period commonly assumed to be sufficient to see a clinical effect of a vaccine, because it would also be the time frame within which someone who was infected initially would fall ill and perhaps die. Had the observation period been longer, the clinical effect size might have increased, i.e., the NNTV could have become lower and, consequently, the ratio of benefit to harm could have increased in favor of the vaccines. However, as noted above, there is also the possibility of side effects developing with some delay and influencing the risk–benefit ratio in the opposite direction"

Some of the counter-arguments on Twitter seem to criticize the paper for being bad and then make other dubious arguments of their own (it's frustrating, nearly all COVID research is like this). For example "Health Nerd" states:

"10/n If you assume that everyone who stays alive will get infected without a vaccine eventually - which is a fact"

That is not in any way a "fact". That is a model assumption based on epidemiological theory that has not yet yielded any usefully accurate predictions. The theory is so weak you could have made exactly the same arguments on exactly the same grounds for SARS-1 or MERS-CoV or really any infectious disease at all, yet the world is full of infectious diseases and people who have never caught them. Additionally it ignores the way viruses seem to become less dangerous over time as they evolve to optimize for propagation rather than killing their host, meaning even the very nature of what people eventually may get infected with can be very different. This is already visible with the discussion of how the delta variant has milder symptoms than the original.