skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Interestingly, if my calculations are correct, a 1kWh car lead acid battery costs $80+tax retail - https://www.autozone.com/batteries-starting-and-charging/bat...

Obviously, besides batteries, you need other components to transmit, convert, etc electricity, yet the difference is quite large.

I guess question becomes - how much it will cost to maintain such cryogenic storage solution vs replacing lead acid batteries over time.

EDIT: while shopping for a used UPS unit for my server rack, with expectation that the unit itself will come without batteries and I will purchase new batteries separately, I was getting about $125-$150 per kWh for everything, including UPS itself and a set of new batteries.

I am not proposing to use used tech to build such a storage, just interesting to look at prices.
To strengthen your point, it's actually been out for 21 years. :)
Technically, when someone sees an object flying in the air but cannot identify what it is, that is by definition a UFO. So UFO's are definitely real.

Flying saucers are also real, just throw a saucer in the air.
Submitting only articles from your own site generally counts as "using HN for promotion" since people usually do that to promote their site.

Of course, there's a spectrum here, ranging on the one hand from blogspammers who use HN as a dumping ground for dozens of their articles, to the technical blogger who maybe posts something once or twice a year about their original investigations. The former is on the spammy side, the latter is not, especially when the account is participating in the community in other good-faith ways.
> Unless you are Github, in which case having your AI copy code vertabim is ok?

You have to filter out any non-copyrightable elements before you do the substantial similarity analysis. For code, that means removing non-expressive elements like arithmetic or boolean expressions, looping, recursion, conditionals, etc. APIs are not copyrightable under the recent Supreme Court holding in Google v. Oracle.

How much of your code is actually left after filtration?
If you’re poor, you're even hotter during the heat wave
He describes it in his post. It is designed to magically and globally hit your Realtek chip!
The problem is three-fold.

1) Too much money in the system from close to 13 years of almost uninterupted qantitative easing.

2) Not enough collateral in the financial system to offset the liability of holding so much customer money (as a bank), with increased uncertainty about an impending market correction (hence banks favoring short-term, safe returns that they can mobilise very quickly).

3) Not enough collateral to keep leverage in check with mandatory limits (these mandatory limits were suspended through covid-19 times and have just been reinstated, although I may have missed this date being pushed out).
>> machine generated code is not derivative work

Even if true, that doesn't indemnify copilot here. There is no way to _prove_ whether the code was generated by copilot vs yourself. Copilot is just autocomplete, so its still a human checking in the code. While it might not be illegal for copilot to generate those things, its illegal for a human to check it in and claim it as their own.
Why didn't Hitler just not invade Russia!?

Because history is a dynamically evolving event, not something someone can 100% accurately predict just cause they read someone in a different era did something similar.
The typical police cruiser has a much more severe space premium, particularly for first aid supplies. An ambulance is a whole box full of first aid supplies.
It isn't "10+ other people wrote that", though. It's the same work, by the same person, being represented 10+ times in the training corpus.
You can get rr in many ways: distro packages, Github release downloads, cloning the repo and building it yourself. It's difficult to track all that.

Also it matters how much people use rr. If a lot of people download it, use it once and never use it again that's important information (especially if you also report when it worked and when it didn't work).
When you travel by armchair, you can travel in time as well as space.

Serious modern travel writing in the West goes back 150 years. In those earlier days, the differences between your culture and the visited cultures were much more pronounced and authentic. And the lived experience of the travelers themselves are different enough from our lives today to provide valuable insights in themselves.

In the East, the tradition goes back even further. See the book Inscribed Landscapes by Strassberg.

Pros: Travel in time and space. Safer across nearly all dimensions, more comfortable seating, familiar bathroom facilities, no language barrier, tiny logistical expense in either money or time, more authentic than the curated tourism industry bubble in which most travelers find themselves. No passport control. You can get the same tchotchkes online as you could there in person. If you want images beyond the words, the Internet is always there to fill in the visual blanks.

And when you get homesick, all you have to do is lift your head.

Others can add the cons.
It's not a practical problem. Renderings are all based on fixed resolution, so the approximation doesn't have to be arbitrarily close. Note this doesn't mean most of the renderers aren't wrong in subtle and not so subtle ways ways, but that you can do something reasonably careful with it and not need unbounded computation.
ABC mum when asked if iview user data is fed to Google, Facebook
You link says Lebanon is a buffer state between Syria and Israel, but Syria and Israel share a border?
They aren’t very good experts if they dont’t read Janes

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:KH-11-best-SHIPYARD....

I saw that published 35 years ago.
Sure, but you might not like the OSTs as much if you haven't played the games they accompany. I usually listen either on Spotify or Youtube. Here are some I've been listening to recently

- Celeste - https://open.spotify.com/album/5OZHQ7KG8k04IOkF50fACO

- SpaceChem - https://open.spotify.com/album/51EoYHhpOsy9l47Txvwi1b

- Chrono Trigger - https://open.spotify.com/album/2kOD9QzcUkeT57RJkNvQpH
> I think your argument is still somewhat compelling, and some people will probably take your position.

I didn't mean to take a side or argue a position here. I was just pointing out that licenses hold no legal power in the event that copyright itself doesn't apply.

> ... So why wouldn't copyright restrict usage of source code in similar situations?

I'm certainly not an expert here but I believe you are mistaken about the extent to which current copyright law (in the US) restricts such usage. I also don't think that the examples you bring up are as simple as you seem to be making out.

You are legally permitted to record broadcast shows for later viewing; you are not permitted to redistribute the recordings though. I assume (but am not certain) that rentals and streaming are the same. (That being said, bypassing DRM has been made its own crime. This effectively amounts to an end run around the rights otherwise granted to you by US copyright law. But then there are specific exceptions where bypassing DRM is permitted. I digress.)

You aren't legally permitted to mirror the contents of a website (such as the New York Times) without permission but you are allowed to access it since they make it publicly available. You are even permitted to save a copy for your own purposes when you access it; you are not permitted to redistribute that copy.

For an extreme example, consider the recent LinkedIn case. Unless I misunderstood it, the court deemed it acceptable to scrape any publicly available content. Certainly most such scraped content was never explicitly licensed for that though!

Even if the license for a piece of code was entirely proprietary, GitHub presumably acquired it through legal means (ie intentional upload). Once they have it in their possession, it's not at all clear to me that current copyright law in the US has anything to say about how they use it (short of redistribution). Of course, if their ToS promises that they won't use it for other purposes then they can't do that. But assuming they never promised you that in the first place ...

There's a traditional argument here about needing a license to legally incorporate the copyrighted work of another into your own.

One possible counter argument is that training a model on publicly available work is analogous to a person viewing that work. So long as the model never outputs any of the original inputs (or only exceedingly small fragments of them that would fall under fair use regardless) it's not clear that those outputs constitute derivatives at all (in the legal sense). Or they might. The courts haven't weighed in yet as far as I know. (Consider GPT-3 or This Waifu Does Not Exist for additional examples of the sort of ambiguity that's possible here.)

Of course, one possible counter to that is that the model itself is (in many cases) effectively a lossily compressed copy of the original input works. So perhaps redistribution of the model itself would be a violation of copyright. But even if that turns out to be the case, it's still not clear that the output of such a model would run afoul of copyright.
So many people ask this. The base machine is Rancilio Silvia, selected because it is relatively cheap, well made, simple, and has no electronics in it. It is a collection of AC switches, thermostats and other AC-powered components.

I don't care about making a blog. I do it for fun. Given choice I would prefer to spend the time doing some more cool projects.
Because removing Canada completely doesn't begin to solve the issue. You need to look at total pollution by country because decisions are made at the country level.
That is no doubt true. And much more pertinent to the suggested use case.
> Look - here’s a helpful lawyer’s template for including for-loops as a claim in your own patents:

A claim on a combination of elements in which one element is an iterative component is not the same as claim on all iterative components everywhere.
> Chisel is therefore it's "synthesizable subset".

Chisel is not synthesizing Scala. It is just a library implemented in Scala that allows you to create a data structure that describes a circuit.

Something like:

circuit = Circuit("test")
module = circuit.module("test")
in0 = module.input("in0")
// ...

The one thing Chisel adds on top of an Object hierarchy that describes a circuit is what PL people normally call "syntactic sugar". I.e., Chisel makes constructing this circuit object look more like a Verilog circuit by taking advantage of some nice Scala features. However, in the background, we are just constructing a data structure that represents a circuit, just like in a GUI library you might construct a data structure that describes your widget hierarchy. Chisel is not High Level Synthesis.
Microbes that feast on crushed rocks thrive in Antarctica's ice-covered lakes
That's still sad though. It's like a prison.
This was kicked off by Lynn Conway's famous VLSI design course at MIT [1], which began the Mead & Conway revolution.

You can find a more detailed write-up of that course and other courses it inspired (as well as some of the practical challenges involved) in her retrospective in IEEE Solid-State Circuits Magazine [2].

An excerpt:

> "Importantly, these weren’t just
any designs, for many pushed the
envelope of system architecture.
Jim Clark, for instance, prototyped
the Geometry Engine and went on to
launch Silicon Graphics Incorporated
based on that work (see Fig. 16).
Guy Steele, Gerry Sussman, Jack
Holloway and Alan Bell created the
follow-on ‘Scheme’ (a dialect of LISP)
microprocessor, another stunning
design."

[1] https://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/VLSI/MIT78/MIT78.htm...

[2] https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6393023
In the video it says that they could not get a range estimate for the object. That implies that it was impossible to estimate its size.
Voting and naming things really gets them going. Remember Boaty McBoatface, or naming a chunk of the space station after Stephen Colbert? Also, it's a long weekend and people are bored.
And yet somehow Audacity has done just fine without this for 21 years.
How do you imagine this working? What are the scenarios where you want shared ownership but can prove that there's only one owner?
Who said anything about cracking skulls? Institutionalization is simply a manner of imprisonment, but it is still in that column. State-run institutions were shut down, but interestingly the amount of "institutionalized" people in the population remained much the same, they basically just moved into the prison system, which I think is arguably worse. But yeah, I'm all for addressing mental health and being more "liberal" with institutionalization. It's better than having crazy people cursing at kids on the street, threatening violence and creating public health hazards.
Do you have any links to books with the annotated disassemblies of the kernal/BASIC interpreter?

To GGP: you should get an 8-bit computer and play around a bit, some things may blow your mind. I first played around with a C64 in around 7th grade, after I'd already learned some programming on PCs, and I learned a lot.
This is by far the most exciting part of the whole idea.

Up here in Alberta Canada we have an oil producing province chock full of people who are against the Federal carbon tax.

Some are climate deniers, but most are rational people who are asking: “Why we should sacrifice our wealth to reduce emissions when capital investment will just flow somewhere that has no carbon tax and the emissions will happen anyways?”

Up until the idea of CBAs started gaining traction the only answer anyone could muster was “Because it’s the right thing to do”, which is incredibly weak and unlikely to convince pragmatic individuals or anyone who benefits from the oil industry (~5% of GDP, so it’s a lot of people).

I hope that CBAs can be a way of addressing this concern such that taking action on climate change doesn’t mean reducing global competitiveness.
Not a refrigerant but sulfur hexafluoride, used as an insulating gas for high voltage applications, has crazy high GWP >20,000
People keep saying it won't happen but Xi has managed to get away with:

* starting a ground war with India

* crushing democracy (what little there was) in HK

* Genocide

* Bullying basically all their neighbours

* Launching a global pandemic and lying about it

Is an invasion of a "renegade province" really off the table? Really? When Xi ran on nationalism and has delivered on it and is guaranteed Premiership for life? When the rest of the world has never been more reliant on China and less united?

It's an unpleasant thought, but now would be the optimal time.
All things considered, managing fewer hosts is nicer than more hosts.

In some hardware generations, dual socket has pretty good cost and complexity tradeoffs. And if you benefit from having a large dataset in memory on a single machine, dual socket often gets you twice the DIMM sockets and therefore twice the ram. Quad socket has been very expensive (and not great performance) for quite some time, so that's usually out.

Single socket Epyc looks pretty impressive though; although I'm retired and probably won't get to work with those anytime soon.
At least it's better than the lockdowns in 2020.
Any tips on how to find a technical co-founder?
Any good reads on how or where to find a Co-founder. I am non technical and need a technical co-founder. Not really sure where to start looking. An and all advice, links etc. would be greatly appreciated !
Really appreciating this after reading it. Given the analogues in functional languages, I'm thinking of using this more to reason about whole python programs and then implement that reasoning more directly as these graphy compositions. To me it seems like a very elegant abstraction.
That is the opt out for crash reporting, the version checking doesn't show a dialog before it phones home. Version checking is configurable in the settings, but it will run once I guess.
> Are they displaying the license under which said code is licensed when they display a chunk of licensed code? If not, then they’re violating the terms

The GitHub TOS is a license that is separate from the license in the code. It is legal and common for an author to license the same code multiple ways (and the licenses do not have to agree with each other). By agreeing to GitHub’s TOS and uploading code to GH servers, people are licensing GH to display the code, because the license agreement says so explicitly. This could be problematic if someone uploads code they don’t have the rights to upload, but then the violation is the uploader’s, and not GitHub’s.

Additionally, GH has a provision for already licensed code in section D.6:

“6. Contributions Under Repository License

“Whenever you add Content to a repository containing notice of a license, you license that Content under the same terms, and you agree that you have the right to license that Content under those terms. If you have a separate agreement to license that Content under different terms, such as a contributor license agreement, that agreement will supersede.

“Isn't this just how it works already? Yep. This is widely accepted as the norm in the open-source community; it's commonly referred to by the shorthand "inbound=outbound". We're just making it explicit.”

https://docs.github.com/en/github/site-policy/github-terms-o...
Nope, don't disagree with you (I don't think), just adding more color the idiocy of the "theory".
What I don’t get is how can anyone else decide how much UBI I need to do what I want to do, art/science/sports?

Currently people decide how much work they are willing to do - want more stuff, earn more money to buy more stuff

We are already seeing the disaster of Social Security benefits not being enough to fund retirement - how will this work when people don’t even work to save for retirement
Fun fact lold a lot. Are you seriously writing this in the context of the article?
There's small things you miss out when mentoring someone remotely. I learned a lot from how my seniors would use shortcuts for everything, the way they'd arrange windows on the monitor, which tabs they kept open, and the way files were arranged.

Even when I mentor juniors, often I see them struggling with an unclosed bracket and tell them to CTRL+ALT+L or CTRL+B to jump into a method. You can learn all this in courses, but sometimes it's not clear what you haven't learned.
> that’s the person who uploaded the code’s infringement rather than GitHub’s

That's not how it works. Anyone and everyone who distributes it is infringing and carries risk of enforcement action. That could also be someone further downstream.

> Furthermore, as described in the article, the legal precedent has been that you don’t actually need copyright to something to train a model on it.

I'm not commenting on this aspect.
> What I'd like to see is something that does static analysis for reference-counted items.

This ought to be doable with GhostCell and similar efforts. https://plv.mpi-sws.org/rustbelt/ghostcell/ It doesn't cover the entire spectrum of "borrow safety proofs" but it can be used to address simple cases.
Is gauze packing like this something that a typically trained police officer could do? If not, that might be the main benefit of the device. Otherwise, yeah, I guess an EMS that deals with these issues regularly may have the process down well enough that speed isn't the issue.

Also curious, because I know nothing about trauma wounds like this. I know I'm wrong, but I don't know why: Could you use tissue glue to seal the edges? It seems like that's what would happen in surgery for a permanent "fix" anyway, so doing it temporarily in the field, with the edges adhering to themselves, would reduce the need for compression.
e.g. there are exactly two owners and only one is &mut-ing at a time.
Gareth Samuel: The Structured Atom Model
You know, China's system made wonders. Maybe everyone should follow it? No other system achieved such an unprecedented economic growth and lifted so many people out of poverty. Freedom? No need, you don't have more in the US anyway. US is just better at PR towards some of its own citizens.

Dismissing criticism about our system,in which the officials just do whatever they want without checks and lie every four years to keep doing it, by saying "tell me a better system", implies you have given up. Good for you, but at some point the "best system in the world" was monarchy because the question "can you tell me a better system" had no answer either.
Can it pass the usual Snell helmet tests? [1]

[1] https://smf.org/testing
Such an UK invention / media article. Reminds me of 4Chans weekly review of bin fires reported by the UK media.

Random fact acid attacks are mostly against men. Although it's somewhat equal around the world the UK where it's one of the highest rates tips it to men. (Like all stats the different NGO's argue this differently)
The GCC static analyzer can dump quite a lot of its state. Considering how awful C is from an analysis perspective it's impressive
I agree with your main point, but note that a gender-height correlation is effectively the basis of a linear regression, the most basic of all ML models.
What I'm not seeing is any safety testing at all that was done on this design. Which seems a big oversight.
China produces much for the world. Offshoring production to them has put them in a unique position where they produce much of the world's greenhouse gases.

Population size doesn't matter.

China produces 5 times more than India. More than double the US at similiar economic levels.

China is the problem. China is the solution.

China produces more greenhouse gases than all developed nations combined.
Not yet. Currently the demand for carbon offsets is tiny, so the supply is correspondingly low.

You would have to bootstrap the system by inserting a large number of 'phantom offsets' into the market at the start. These fake offsets will be retired on a schedule or formula so that companies deciding to enter the carbon offset industry have a good idea about demand during their planning stages.
I find this trend against reasonable telemetry in OSS ridiculous and naively idealistic. I could also divine that perhaps 90%+ of Audacity users use a closed source application that uses invasive telemetry.

The way the free software community treats its own is reminiscent of progressives in America: constantly eating your own kind while letting your opponents flourish.

There’s a reasonable amount of telemetry, and without it the free, OSS side can’t compete with closed source products on a level playing field.

I’ll even go further and suggest that light telemetry should be on (and able to be disabled) by default.
Why is China producing 5 times more greenhouse gas than India at similiar populations?
I was to comment the same the other day , but the post was about some book the author was promoting so I didnt want to be a party popper but the book was totally mediocre.

It seems to me the inevitable destiny of all "tech" press, start with strong titles and devolve into crap, or to be fairer a crap-shoot.

So now you have:

ALWAYS HAVE BEEN "CRAP" = Packt and Apress

STARTED OK,GOOD NOW MOSTLY CRAP = Pragmatic, Manning, No Starch

STILL OK,GOOD = O'Reilly, CUP
If the telemetry was even opt-out at run time, the fork would never have happened.
No chin strap? First major accident, your head goes one way and the helmet goes another. If you're morbid, a little searching will produce plenty of examples caught on video.